ASSIGNMENT

TECHNOLOGY PARK MALAYSIA

CT068-3-M-ISM
INTEGRATED SYSTEM MANAGEMENT

NPCMF1909ITM

HAND OUT DATE: 01 OCTOBER 2019

HAND IN DATE: 20 FEBRUARY 2020

WEIGHTAGE: 40%

Submitted by: Sudhar Deuja

Roll Number: NP000472

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES:

1 Submit your assignment at the administrative counter.

2 Students are advised to underpin their answers with the use of references (cited using the
Harvard Name System of Referencing).

3 Late submission will be awarded zero (0) unless Extenuating Circumstances (EC) are upheld.

4 Cases of plagiarism will be penalized.

5 The assignment should be bound in an appropriate style (comb bound or stapled).

6 Where the assignment should be submitted in both hardcopy and softcopy, the softcopy of
the written assignment and source code (where appropriate) should be on a CD in an
envelope / CD cover and attached to the hardcopy.

7 You must obtain 50% overall to pass this module.

 ASSIGNMENT
TECHNOLOGY PARK MALAYSIA

CT068-3-M-ISM
INTEGRATED SYSTEM MANAGEMENT

NPCMF1909ITM

A Research Paper

on

Kimberly Clark

Submitted by: Sudhar Deuja

Roll Number: NP000472

Abstract

This research paper is based on an international organization Kimberly Clark. In this research
the problems and issues of the organization are listed and described using various Quality
management tools like Affinity Diagram, Relationship Diagram, Tree Diagram and Ishikawa
Diagram. The frequency of the problems are described using Matrix and Pareto chart. Using
Total Quality Management, Solution to address the issues was proposed. The solution helped
Kimberly Clark to manage the overall business process.

Keywords: Kimberly Clark, Affinity, Relationship, Tree, Ishikawa, Pareto, Matrix, BPM
Table of Contents
1 Background of the case .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 About Kimberly - Clark ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Major Product and Market Share ............................................................................................. 2
1.3 Competitors ............................................................................................................................. 3
2 Identification of Problem ................................................................................................................. 4
2.1 Background Information .......................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Affinity Diagram ....................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Relationship Diagram ............................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Tree Diagram ........................................................................................................................... 8
2.4 Ishikawa Fishbone Diagram .................................................................................................... 10
3 Frequency of the problem ............................................................................................................. 11
3.1 Matrix Diagram ...................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Pareto Chart........................................................................................................................... 11
4 Proposed Solution using TQM ........................................................................................................ 13
4.1 Overview of Solution .............................................................................................................. 13
4.2 Strategy for Quality Improvement .......................................................................................... 13
4.3 Process of the Solution ........................................................................................................... 15
4.4 The benefit of the Solution ..................................................................................................... 17
5 Conclusion, Recommendation and Discussion ................................................................................ 18
6 References..................................................................................................................................... 19
List of Figures

Figure 1: Affinity Diagram Level 1 .............................................................................................6

Figure 2: Affinity Diagram Level 2 .............................................................................................6
Figure 3: Relationship Diagram Level 1 ......................................................................................7
Figure 4: Relationship Diagram Level 2 ......................................................................................7
Figure 5: Tree Diagram ...............................................................................................................9
Figure 6: Fishbone Diagram ...................................................................................................... 10
Figure 7: Matrix Diagram .......................................................................................................... 11
Figure 8: Pareto Table ............................................................................................................... 12
Figure 9: Pareto Chart ............................................................................................................... 12
Figure 10: BPM lifecycle (Gillot, 2008) .................................................................................... 15
Figure 11: System Requirement ................................................................................................ 17
1 Background of the case
1.1 About Kimberly - Clark
In 1872 Kimberly was founded in Neenah, Wisconsin, USA by five Wisconsin businessman with
the initial capital of $30,000. Kimberly operated its first paper mill business, similarly, their first
product was newsprint made from cotton rag and linen. After acquiring the Atlas paper mill, in
1880 the company was incorporated as Kimberly & Clark Company. By 1892, Kimberly & Clark
Co. was one of the largest paper company in the fox river valley with $1.5 million capital. (Thomas
Heinrich, 2004) In the early 20th century, Kimberly’s shifted their paper making business into a
consumer product. Kimberly introduced Cellucotton in 1914 which was used as bandages. During
World War I, cellucotton was thereafter used as surgical cotton and disposable sanitary napkins
by US Army nurses. After realizing the commercial possibilities of cellucotton napkins, Kimberly
introduced its first feminine hygiene disposable napkins called Kotex in 1920. After the success
of Kotex, Kimberly again released another disposable tissue, named as Kleenex in 1924. Kleenex
was used as a cold cream removing towel. After partnering with the New York Times Company
to build newsprint mill, Kimberly & Clark Company was reorganized and reincorporated as
Kimberly-Clark Corporation in 1928. Post World War II, in the 1960’s Kimberly expanded its
operation globally to 20 foreign lands. (Purkayastha & Rao, 2008) (Anon., 2020)

Further to compete with the key player, Proctor & Gamble Co.’s (P&G) Pampers, in the market
Kimberly introduced a premium diaper called Huggies in 1978 which was an immediate success.
By the year of 1984, Huggies covered at least 50% of the market share. After Wayne R. Sanders
was appointed as a chairman and CEO of Kimberly in 1992, Kimberly merged with Scott Paper
Co. in 1995 which helped Kimberly to achieve the second position in the paper product industry
and doubled the revenue. With this, consumer product business became Kimberly’s prime focus
business rather than paper and pulp products business. Kimberly was expanding and further
strengthening its business in the professional health products market.

Under Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Kleenex was the most popular brand name used for different
products such as facial tissues, paper towels, bathroom tissues, and diapers. The brand identity of
Kleenex became a huge success that it became a generic term for facial tissue products. With the
entry of the low-priced private label competitors’ products in 2001, the sales of Kleenex began
shrinking. To revamp the Kleenex brand and raise awareness about the brand to the new customers,

1
Kimberly launched the ‘Let it out’ marketing campaign in 2006. This campaign was considered as
a success because it helped to increase the sales of Kleenex product and also improved the brand
image in 2007, however, Kleenex was criticized by different environmental protection groups such
as Greenpeace and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) for the environmental impact
caused by tree-cutting from the ancient forest to produce its tissue products. ‘Kleercut’ was the
advertisement campaign started by Greenpeace to increase pressure on Kimberly to change their
business practice. The global sales of Kleenex were US$1.6 billion in 2006, by the time 2007,
Kleenex product was manufactured in 36 different countries and sold in nearly 150 countries. At
present Kimberly Clark is manufactured in 63 countries and sold in 216 different countries with
41,000 employees worldwide.

1.2 Major Product and Market Share

Kimberly Clark has been augmenting its personal care products targeting for both infants and
adults. Such personal care products at present are widely marketed under the popular brand names
as below:

• Adult Care: Depend, Poise, Plenitud

• Baby care Products: Huggies, Pull-ups, Goodnites, DryNites, Little Swimmers, Kleen
Bebe, Green Finger

• Family care: Kleenex, Andrex, Hakle, Cottonelle, Scotex, Page, Neve, Scott, Petalo,
Wondersoft, Tela, Viva

• Feminine care: Kotex, Camelia, Intimus

• Professional Products: Kintech, KleenGuard, WypAll

The company's brand is moreover positioned 1st with its wide ranging market share coverage in
80 different countries. (Clark, n.d.) In fiscal year 2019, the company also succeeded to generate 6
Billion profit. In accordance with the data of 2019 provided in the website of CSI market, K-C
holds 16.66% of market share for the personal care segment, 32.86% market share for consumer
tissue and 47.13% market share for business to business product segment. (CSIMARKET, n.d.)

2
1.3 Competitors
In the initial phase of company's commencement, K-C had only two rivalry competitors namely
Protractor and Gamble (P&G). Whereas in current context, with the globalised and sizable market
the numbers of competitors has increased. Multiple companies namely Unilever, Clorox,
EdgeWell, P&G, Colgate are the key players manufacturing and selling personal and professional
care products similar to those of KK. P&G hold the No.1 position in the market with 67.7 Billion
sales revenue. After KK, Unilever holds third position with 51 Billion revenue.

3
2 Identification of Problem
2.1 Background Information
Though Kimberly Clark is one of the largest company with the variety of its product line, there
are many problems in the organization which can be listed and discussed below.

- No proper legal team: For a big and multinational organization like Kimberly Clark,
proper legal and compliance team is a must. These teams are required to handle the
external forces and unseen conditions that can affect the organization.

- Misleading Information: Kimberly Clark has been providing misleading information to

the general public. They had been lying about the usage of virgin fiber.

- Loss of manpower: With competitors rising every day, the strategies they use are also
creating a problem in employee’s turnover. The competitors are providing better facilities
and benefits due to which Kimberly Clark is facing a loss of manpower.

- A late response to identified problems: Kimberly Clark had been facing a lot of issues
for a long time but they were not engaging in solving and addressing those issues. This
was one of the reasons customer’s trust faded away.

- No CSR Activities: With so many issues inside and outside the organization, there was
no sign of any CSR activities.

- Irresponsible toward environmental responsibility: Kimberly Clark being a paper-

based product, had a direct impact on the environment. Kimberly was not addressing
these issues. This caused a direct impact on global warming and climate change.

- Increase in competition: With numerous rise in a number of competitors, it was getting

very difficult for Kimberly Clark. The competitors came up with new strategies and plan
which influence their loyal customers to change.

4
 - Implementation of new policies: The changing policies of the government creates big
issues inside an organization. Traditional Method: Kimberly Clark used the same
traditional method of advertisement in the business process. With the advancement in
technology and various business process management tools, the traditional method could
not cope up.

- Material Waste: Kimberly Clark seems to have been wasting a lot of materials. They do
not have any tools for monitoring and evaluation of production and manufacturing which
is resulting to waste of materials.

- Useless Large Inventory: As stated earlier, no tools for monitoring, due to which
overproductions are taking place resulting in a useless large inventory.

- Outdated Technology: The machinery manual hardware is getting very old. Today, new
and updated technology with various automation features have taken over the market.
With the use of old technology, it not only hampers the production but the resources are
over or under-utilized, human interventions are required at many places which result in
inefficiency.

2.1 Affinity Diagram

An affinity diagram is one of the seven management tools for planning which is prepared from a
brainstorming session for the structured output. This diagram was developed by Kawakita Jiro in
the 1960s. It is mostly used to gather information, organize and combine information to solve the
issues which an organization is facing in their product, process or problem. (Graham & Cleary,
n.d.)

5
Issues of Kimberly Clark in the affinity diagram can be listed as below diagram.

Figure 1: Affinity Diagram Level 1

Figure 2: Affinity Diagram Level 2

2.2 Relationship Diagram

Relationship diagram is also known as new management planning tools which help to identify
logical relationships between cause and effect. The main purpose of the Relationship diagram is
to identify relationships that are not easily recognizable. This diagram helps to analyze the links
between different aspects of a complex situation. (Andersen & Fagerhaug, 2006). The problem
and issues of Kimberly Clark are represented in the below relationship diagram.

6
Figure 3: Relationship Diagram Level 1

Figure 4: Relationship Diagram Level 2

7
2.3 Tree Diagram
Tree Diagram is one of the management tool used to break down complex categories into simpler
details and assemble them in the hierarchy of tasks and subtasks which help to solve the problem.
When the general issue is identified and you need to convert or break it down to specific details
then the tree diagram is used. (Tague, 2005). The objective and strategies to overcome the problem
of Kimberly Clark are represented below in the tree diagram.

8
Figure 5: Tree Diagram

9
2.4 Ishikawa Fishbone Diagram
In the given case, many problems can be depicted and discuss further to identify the root cause
and suitable solutions. For this, we can use the Ishikawa diagram also known as the fishbone
diagram/cause and effect diagram. Ishikawa diagram is a type of casual map used as a graphical
tool to identify the root causes of the problem. Ishikawa diagram is one of the popular and widely
used diagrams among the other type of casual map diagrams such as impact tree, root cause trees,
and strategy maps. Fishbone diagram was developed in the 1960s by Dr. Koru Ishikawa who was
also known as one of the founding fathers of modern management who pioneered the quality
management process. Fishbone diagram is generally developed in a brainstorming process to find
the root causes of the problem. Most of the firms use “6 Ms” causes for the fishbone diagram such
as Machines, Methods, Manpower, Materials, Measurement, and Mother Nature (environment).
However, there are some critics and arguments that the list is confining.

Figure 6: Fishbone Diagram

10
3 Frequency of the problem
3.1 Matrix Diagram
Matrix diagram or matrix chart is a management tool used to show the relationship between
multiple information. (Tague, 2005) It helps to systematically organize data to make a comparison
for decision making. It consists of multiple rows and columns whose relation is checked by their
intersection. There are 6 different shapes of Matrix diagrams such as L, T, Y, X, C, and roof-
shaped. (Charantimath, 2006)

Figure 7: Matrix Diagram

3.2 Pareto Chart

Pareto Chart is derived from Pareto Principal which is used as a powerful decision-making tool
for quality improvement. The Pareto chart is based on the Pareto principle which explains 80% of
the output in a given situation is caused or produced by 20% of the input. Pareto Chart is named
after Vilfredo Pareto, An Italian Economist. (Radson & Boyd, 2007) A Pareto Chart is a
combination of a line graph and a bar graph that represents the frequency of the problem as well
as their cumulative impact. Pareto Chart is one of the quality control tools which is very useful for
analyzing the problem which requires more attention. (Abraham Grosfeld-Nir, 2007).

11
Figure 8: Pareto Table

Figure 9: Pareto Chart

12
After preparing Pareto chart based on assumed data 4 major points are highlighted by applying 80-
20 rule. Traditional business practice, Increase in competition, Outdated Technology and Material
Waste are the vital few cause which K-C need to put more attention to solve their problem.

4 Proposed Solution using TQM

After researching about Kimberly Clark Co, with the help me matrix chart and Pareto Chart
problems and their root causes are identified. To resolve these issues, the best possible
management tools we can implement is Total Quality Management (TQM). TQM is a continual
process of identifying and removing issues in production, improving the consumer experience,
restructuring supply chain and staff training for the growth of an organization. (BARONE, 2020)

4.1 Overview of Solution

After analyzing the K-C’s case, the executing of traditional methods was found to be the root cause
which resulted in poor adaptability. K-C’s traditional business practice was creating inefficiency
in the working environment and poor utilization of the company’s resources. With traditional
business practice, K-C was failing to cope with the changes occurred in the internal and external
environment of the business. Henceforth, BPM can provide K-C as an IT solution to replace their
traditional ways of doing business. BPM is known as business process management which helps
to identify, study, measure, develop and automate business processes. It helps to improve the
performance of a business. The main objective of BPM is to eliminate errors, improve workflow
and reduce ineffectiveness of an organization. BPM is a management discipline based on using
business processes as an important contributor to accomplish an organization’s plan and business
goals by considerably and sustainably improving performance. (Jeston & Nelis, 2014)

4.2 Strategy for Quality Improvement

Poor adaptability to change is the main problem of Kimberly Clark Co according to my research.
Traditional business practice, increase in competition, material waste and use of outdated
technology and process are the main causes of the problem identified using Pareto Chart. As an IT
solution, BPM is proposed as a solution to support TQM practices in the company. Moreover,

13
while implementing a BPM system in K-C, business process benchmarking stands out to be the
best strategy for achieving quality improvement.

Benchmarking is a performance improvement process by comparing with the organization best

practice for any product or service process and frequently recognizing, understanding and
implementing best practices and processes. Benchmarking can be done inside and outside the
company. (Stapenhurst, 2009). Among different types of benchmarking, few can be implemented
in K-C Co while implementing BPM.

Strategic benchmarking: This is one of the types of benchmarking where companies that have
best practice will be studied to improve the overall performance of the company. (Bhutta & Huq,
1999) Observation in terms of process, innovation strategies, product/service development needs
to be done. To implement BPM this is very important because this will give a clear picture of the
business process of an organization that is doing well in the market.

Competitive benchmarking: This type of benchmarking is done to compare the performance of

a company with its core competitors which belong to the same product group and industry.
(Bhutta & Huq, 1999) In K-C’s case, they can compare with P&G. While implementing BPM
this benchmarking process help to set the business process for good practice.

Process benchmarking: This benchmarking process is generally used to improve companies'

business processes by comparing it with the best practice company which is following the same
process. (Bhutta & Huq, 1999)

14
4.3 Process of the Solution

The proposed solution for Kimberly Clark Co is a Business Process Management (BPM) System.
The process of BPM can be classified into 5 different categories as below.

Design

Optimization Modeling
BPM
Life
Cycle

Monitoring Execution

Figure 10: BPM lifecycle (Gillot, 2008)

Design:

This is the first step of Business Process Management which includes the collection of all data,
workflow and business process. This helps to identify all the existing processes and required a new
process for the smooth workflow of an organization.

Modeling:

This process helps to create a workflow layout for every process required. The possible condition
under which what type of process should be implemented is fixed in this process.

15
Execution:

Every process that has fixed while designing and modeling will be tested in this process. While
deploying business process management, human-driven process and software-driven process are
tested properly to avoid errors in real-time execution.

Monitor:

After implementing BPM, the system should be monitor in terms of performance, measure
efficiency and identify an issue that is causing inefficiency. Process mining can be used to spot
inconsistencies between the actual process implementation. Predictive Business Process
Monitoring forecast the future issues and process with the help of machine learning, data mining
other projecting techniques.

Optimize:

This is the last step of the BPM process. From the Modeling, execution and optimization process,
any changes required in the existing software to improve the efficiency are addressed in this
process.

Type of BPM System available:

There are many types of BPM software available in the market, Some of the available BPM
products are

- Nintex Platform
- Appian
- Pega Platform
- Trisotech
- Novacura

Among these, the Nintex Platform will be suitable for Kimberly Clark. This software has
many features like platform user management, platform securities, Drag and Drop features,
Dashboard, Report generation, form builder, etc.

16
 Figure 11: System Requirement

4.4 The benefit of the Solution

BPM system helps to improve business processes. Some of the examples of benefits K-C’s can
get from using Nintex BPM Software are as follows
 Reduce cost
 Reduce waste material
 Revenue increase
 Process Control
 Alignment of Business and IT
 Increase customer satisfaction
 Ensuring regulatory compliance
 Increasing accountability
 Reducing inefficiencies
 Driving competitive advantages
 Simplify process and workflow
 Improving business agility
 Move toward digital transformation

17
5 Conclusion, Recommendation and Discussion
This study based on the understanding of K-C’s case study, provided the opportunity to deep dive
into the long history of the K-C and its business practices. It was studied that K-C was aggressively
involved in strong marketing campaign for their promoting their brand and despite such impressive
marketing strategies K-C was struggling to make successful impact in its competitive market. To
gain an in-depth knowledge on the issues of K-C, this paper attempted to thoroughly examine the
all the possible causes by implementing different useful management tools to identify the major
problem. So after the detail problem identification process, the K-C’s poor ability to adapt to
change was found out to be the major problems of the company. Moreover, the root cause that
generated the problem was the traditional approach of performing the business activities and
methods. The K-C’s was of conducting business practices were creating inefficiency which
affected the company ability to promptly and proactively cope with the change in its business
environment. As a solution to the problem identified, this paper suggested the integration of
business process management system to examine, study, measure, develop and automate every
unit of business processes in the organization. Therefore, with the utilization of BPM integration,
K-C can increase its business performance while being agility which directly helps the company
to adapt to change and grab opportunities for business success. Furthermore, benchmarking was
used as quality improvement to incorporate quality business process in the company.

To summarize, this paper suggests K-C to incorporate BPM system while implementing
benchmarking approach for the continuous improvement of the business processes to ensure the
company is performing with standardized and quality process to easily adapt with the changes
occurred in internal as well external environment of the company.

18
6 References
Abraham Grosfeld-Nir, B. R. &. N. K., 2007. The Pareto managerial principle: when does it apply?.
s.l.:International Journal of Production Research.

Andersen, B. & Fagerhaug, T., 2006. Root Cause Analysis, Second Edition: Simplified Tools and
Techniques. s.l.:s.n.

Anon., 2020. Kimberly-Clark Corporation .. [Online]

Available at: https://www.encyclopedia.com/books/politics-and-business-magazines/kimberly-clark-
corporation

BARONE, A., 2020. Total Quality Management (TQM). [Online]

Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/total-quality-management-tqm.asp

Bhutta, K. S. & Huq, F., 1999. Benchmarking – best practices: An integrated. Benchmarking: An
International Journal, 6(3), pp. 254-268.

Charantimath, P. M., 2006. Total Quality Management. s.l.:Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Clark, K., n.d. Kimberly Clark. [Online]

Available at: https://www.kimberly-clark.com/en/company/about-us

CSIMARKET, n.d. Kimberly-clark Corporation. [Online]

Available at: https://csimarket.com/stocks/competitionSEG2.php?code=KMB

Gillot, J.-N., 2008. The Complete Guide to Business Process Management. s.l.:s.n.

Graham, J. D. & Cleary, M. J., n.d. Practical Tools for Continuous Improvement, Vol. 2: Problem-Solving
and Planning Tools. s.l.:PQ Systems.

Hill, A. V., 2012. The Encyclopedia of Operations Management: A Field Manual and Glossary of
Operations Management. s.l.:s.n.

Jeston, J. & Nelis, J., 2014. Business Process Management. 3 ed. s.l.:Routledge.

Purkayastha, D. & Rao, A. S., 2008. Kleenex: The Saga of a Super Brand. s.l.:IBS Center for Management
Research.

Radson, D. & Boyd, A. H., 2007. THE PARETO PRINCIPLE AND RATE ANALYSIS, Quality Engineering. s.l.:
Taylor & Francis.

Stapenhurst, T., 2009. The Benchmarking Book. s.l.:Routledge.

Tague, N. R., 2005. The Quality Toolbox. Second ed. s.l.:Quality Press.

Thomas Heinrich, B. B., 2004. Kotex, Kleenex, Huggies: Kimberly-Clark and the Consumer Revolution in
American Business.. s.l.:Ohio State University Press.

19
20