Lean Six Sigm Program Nam

<Project Title (State From ... To)>
< Last Name, First Name > Wave No: <xx> Review Date: <xx/xx/xxxx>

DefineMeasure Analyze Improve Control

LEAN SIX SIGMA

DefineMeasure Analyze Improve Control

LEAN SIX SIGMA

Lean Six Sigm Program Nam

Analyze Phase Road Map
Define Measure Analyze Improve

Analyze

Control

Activities
• Identify • Reduce • Confirm

Tools
• Process

Potential Root Causes List of Potential Root Causes Root Cause to Output Relationship Impact of Root Causes on Key Root Causes Analyze Gate

Constraint ID and Takt Time

Analysis
• Cause • FMEA • Hypothesis • Simple • ANOVA • Components • Conquering

& Effect Analysis Tests/Conf. Intervals

• Estimate

Outputs
• Prioritize • Complete

& Multiple Regression of Variation

Product and Process

Complexity
• Queuing

Theory

Bonacorsi Consulting

3

Measure Overview
Process Capability
      

Analyze

Graphical Analysis
I -MR Chart of Delivery Tim e
40 UC L=37.70 In ivid a V lu d u l a e 35 30 25 20 1 28 55 82 109 LC L=20.56 136 Observation 163 190 217 244 _ X=29.13

CTQ: ? Unit (d) or Mean (c): ? Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? DPMO (d): ? Sigma (Short Term): ?
M ovin R n e g a g

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

10.0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0.0 1 28 55 82 109 136 Observation 163 190 217 244

UC L=10.53

__ MR=3.22

LC L=0

Root Cause / Quick Win
 Root

Tools Used
      

cause: cause: cause:

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

Quick Win #1

 Root

Quick Win #2

 Root

Quick Win #3

Bonacorsi Consulting

4

Graphical Analysis Summary
Normal Non-Normal Average Median or Q1 or Q3

Analyze

Data is Continuous: ?? Data Points Collected Between XX/XX/XX and XX/XX/XX Normality Central Tendency Variation
Std. Dev (long term) Span (1/99) or Stability Factor (Q1/Q3)

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 Area 1 Sub area 1 Sub area 1 Transportation <Area 1> <Sub area 1> Area 1

Analyze

Was the Action workout  performed #1? <Right Click, and select Add Text>

NVA
Area 1 Sub area 1 Waiting

Area 1 Sub area 1 Processing Motion

Area 1 Sub area 1 Inventory

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

< Insert your variation  percentage as shown  in pie chart >

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 Reach Meets Clarity, Feedback Available Options Decision Req Accuracy 10 7 6 7 10 9 Budget for Options 5 Funding Source Identified Process Outputs 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 Approve options Proper decision makers Inventory Search of Database, tribal known Vacant Space knowledge Interview Customer to Form Understand Form Brief customer on options, costs, schedule options options, funding vehicle 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 Importance 7 Rating 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> 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>

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

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

Pareto Chart
100 80

Count

100

60 40

50 20 0 0
u So th r No th s Ea t he Ot rs

Defect
Count Percent 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

Fitted Line Plot
Wait Time = 32.05 + 0.5825 D eliveries 55 S R-Sq R-Sq(adj)

Analyze

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

1.11885 94.1% 93.9%

50 W i Tm at i e

45

40

35 10 15 20 25 Deliveries 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

Analyze

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

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

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Bonacorsi Consulting
14

One Way ANOVA

Boxplots of Net Hour by Part/No
(means are indicated by solid circles)

Analyze

Net Hours Call Open

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

It is also caused by the need for technicians to make a second visit to the end user to 0 complete the part Part/No Part replacement. Next step will be for the of Variance for Net Hour Analysis team to confirm these suspected root causes. Source DF SS MS F
Part/No Error Total Level No Part Part 1 69 70 N 27 44 7421 59194 66615 Mean 21.99 43.05 29.29 7421 858 StDev 19.95 33.70 8.65

50

No Part

P 0.004

Pooled StDev =

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

Because the pvalue <= 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

Mood’s Median

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. 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.
Q3-Q1 12.15 10.52 7.10

40

Dotplots of Defects by Impact on Dot Plot: Part/ No Part Subgroup
Ticket Cycle Time

30

Defects

20

10

0 After Before

Subgroup

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

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

Because the pvalue <= 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 1 2 3 4 5 Total Chi-Sq = 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 94 246 164 304 901

Analyze

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)

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

­­

<Right Click, and select Add Text> ­­ 

<Right Click, and select Add Text> ­­­ 

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Bonacorsi Consulting
18

Hypothesis Test Summary

Analyze

Was the hypothesis roadmap  followed? <Right Click, and select Add Text> What was the power and  Sample Size? 

<Right Click, and select Add Text>

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

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 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

Analyze

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

Training & Development

Measurements & Reward

Communication

Organization Design

Information Systems

Resource Allocation

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Bonacorsi Consulting
22

Quick Wins
     

Analyze

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
23

  

Bonacorsi Consulting

Business Impact
  

Analyze

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 Replicated Estimate
• 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: ?

Revenue  Enhancement Expenses  Reduction Loss  Reduction Cost  Avoidance Total Savings

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Bonacorsi Consulting
24

Business Impact Details
 

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 ) 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)

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

Analyze

Key actions completed Issues Lessons learned Communication s, team building, organizational activities

 

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Bonacorsi Consulting
26

Next Steps
   

Analyze

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

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
• 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

Analyze

Enter Name Here Enter Name Here
Sponsor / Process Owner

Enter Name Here
Deployment Champion

Green Belt/Black Belt

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 Steven Bonacorsi is a Senior Master law.

Black Belt instructor and coach. © 2006 by Bonacorsi Consulting, L.L.C. Steven Bonacorsi has trained All Rights Reserved. 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