Six Sigma DMAIC Improvement Story

Green Belt Project Objective:

Reduce Construction Project Variances

Team: CPS 2
John Frank (Co-Team Ldr)
Allison Macdonald (Co-Team Ldr)
Matt Hammond Matt Beard
Kenney Cooper (Polk County)
Howard Tipton (Sponsor)
Lean Six Sigma Problem Solving Process 2

• Select Problem
• Identify Project Charter
• Develop Project Timeline
• Establish Method to Monitor Team Progress
Define • Construct Process Flow Chart
• Develop Data Collection Plan

Team used the 5-Step • Display Indicator Performance “Gap”

DMAIC problem solving • Stratify Problem (i.e. “Gap”)

• Identify Problem Statement
process Measure

• Identify Potential Root Causes(s)

• Verify Root Cause(s)
Analyze

• Identify and Select Improvement(s)

• Identify Barriers and Aids
• Develop and Implement Improvement Plan
Improve • Confirm Improvement Results

• Standardize Improvements within Operations

• Implement Process Control System (PCS)
• Document Lessons Learned
Control • Identify Future Plans
Select Problem 3

The Green Belt Class brainstormed many possible projects and multi-voted them
down to nine (9) for evaluation.

Process Selection Matrix

Selection Criteria
A B
Com- Impact Need
C=AxB
parative Customer on to
Data (Internal or
Customer Improve Select
(Accuracy/ Cost (Performance
Project Avail? External) /Timeliness) Gap) Overall Y/N
1) Improve Economic Development Tax Payer/ 5 5 25 N- No Class
Citizen
SMEs
2) Reduce Inmate Medical Costs Supv/Mgmt 5 5 25 Y
3) Improve Workplace Security Empl/Citizen 5 4 20 Y
4) Improve Construction Project Inspection FBC Supvn/Mgmt 5 4 20 Y
process and manage costs
5) Improve Maintenance Performance Tax Payer/ 4 4 16 N- Overlaps with
Reduce Costs Citizen/Staff other projects
6) Reduce Time to Fill Employee Vacancy Supvn/Mgmt 3 5 15 Y
FBC
/ Staff/Citizen
7) Reduce Employee Turnover FBC Supv/Mgmt 5 3 15 N
8) Reduce County Facility Energy Tax Payer 3 3 9 N
Consumption
9) Address Citizen Requests/Complaints Citizen/ Tax 4 2 8 N
Timely Payer
5= Extreme 3= Moderate
Rating Scores:
4= High 2= Low 1=None

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Project Alignment to Strategy 4

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Develop Project Charter 5

Project Charter
Project Name: County Project Management
Business Many recently completed Construction Projects have been over budget. Negative Project Variances
Problem/Impact: usually are associated with delays in the project completion and reduce other funds that may be needed
Case
for other county services.
Expected Benefits: Reduction in Project actual costs
Outcome Indicator(s) Q1- Project Variance Percentage[100*(Actual $-Planned$)/Planned$]
Proposed Target(s) Target= 0%
Objectives Time Frame: Dec 2015- April 15 2016
Supports County's "Design, Construct and Maintain Infrastructure
Strategic Alignment:
" strategic objectives

In Scope:
SLC Capital Construction Projects over $50k
Scope
Out-of-Scope:
Projects under $50k
Authorized by: Howard Tipton
Sponsor: Howard Tipton
Team Leader: John Frank, Allison Macdonald
Team
Team Members:
Matt Hammond Matt Beard Kenney Cooper (Polk County)
Process Owner(s): HR Administrator
Mgmt Review Team: County Administrator and direct reports
Completion Date: 15-Apr-16
Review Dates: Monthly and Final Review in April 2016
Schedule
Key Milestone Dates:
See Action Plan

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Develop Project Timeline 6

DMAIC Story WHEN

2015 2016
Process Step Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

1. Define Completed 1/6/16

Completed 1/26/16
2. Measure

3. Analyze Completed 2/17/16

Completed 2/29/16
4. Improve
4/15/16
5. Control

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Monitor Team Progress 7

DMAIC Story Checkpoints

Objective: Demonstrate the importance of improvement needs in measurable terms.
 Team identified an indicator;
1. The stakeholders' need(s) were identified.
Step 1 2. The problem can be described as an "object" with a "defect" with unknown cause(s) that need to

Flowchart, Spreadsheet; SIPOC,

be identified.
Define 3. A line graph outcome indicator was constructed that appropriately measures the problem (or gap).

4. A schedule for completing the five DMAIC Story steps was developed. Cust Requirements matrix
Objective: Investigate the features of the indicator, stratify the problem and set a target for improvement.
5. Data contained or directly linked to the indicator were stratified from various viewpoints (i.e., what,
where, when and who) and a significant dataset was chosen.
Step 2
 Paretos, Histograms
6. A target for improvement was established based on the stakeholders' need.
Measure
PLAN

7. The impact of the target on the indicator was determined.

8. A problem statement that describes the "remaining dataset" was developed.
Objective: Analyze the stratified data to identify and verify the root causes.
9. Cause and effect analysis was taken to the root level.
Step 3 10. Potential causes most likely to have the greatest impact on the problem were selected.  Single Case Bore; Fishbone ; RC
Analyze
Verification Matrix
11. A relationship between the root causes and the problem was verified with data.

12. The impact of each root cause on the gap was determined.

Objective: Develop and implement countermeasures to eliminate the verified root causes of the problem.
13. Countermeasures were selected to address verified root causes.

 Countermeasures Matrix;
14. The method for selecting the appropriate countermeasures was clear and considered
effectiveness and feasibility.

Barriers and Aids; Action Plan

DO

15. Barriers and aids were determined for countermeasures worth implementing.
Step 4
16. The action plan reflected accountability and schedule.
Objective: Confirm that the countermeasures taken impacted the root causes and the problem; and that the target has been met.
Improve 17. The effect of countermeasures on the root causes was demonstrated.
CHECK

18. The effect of countermeasures on the problem (or indicator) was demonstrated.
19. The improvement target was achieved and causes of significant variation were addressed.  Line Graph
20. The effect of countermeasures on the indicator representing the stakeholders' need was
demonstrated.
Objective: Prevent the problem and its root causes from recurring. Maintain and share the gains.
21. A method was established to document, permanently change, and communicate the revised
process or standard.
 Process Flowchart; Process
Step 5 22. Responsibility was assigned and periodic checks scheduled to ensure compliance with the
Control Chart
ACT

revised process or standard.

23. Specific areas for replication were identified.
Control Objective: Evaluate the team's effectiveness and plan future activities.
 Lessons Learned
24. Any remaining problems (or gaps) were addressed.
25. Lessons learned, P-D-C-A of the Story process, & team growth were assessed & documented.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Review Process Flow Chart 8

Manage Construction Projects (Process Owner: Operations Administrator )

WHO PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING & 3RD PARTIES ( INTERNAL
CONTRACTOR INSPECTIONS (CEI) DEPTS/ TESTING, ETC.)
STEP
NEED Need To Manage Project Construction To Meet Awarded Contract

The team ISSUE · Issue NTP

constructed a RECEIVE/
SECURE/
CONDUCT
· Receive/Review
Construction
Docs
·
·
·
Secure Materials And Labor
Build Project Components
Report Progress To PM?CEI
·
·
Conduct Daily Inspections
Doc/Report Findings To PM/
Contractor

Process flow REQUEST · Request Interim Inspections As Per

Schedule

chart PERFORM/
REPORT
·
·
Perform Tests And Inspect Construction Components
Report Findings To PM And Contractor

describing
NO Components Failed?

· Review Testing And Inspection Findings And Take Steps To Resolve

REVIEW YES

the Process. P1- % of Components passed per inspection Ready For Substantial
Completion Inspection?
YES
NO

REVIEW/
REQUEST · Review/Resolve Remaining Issues
· Request Substantial Completion
(SC) Review
· Review SC Request & Current Construction Progress
REVIEW/ · Make Recommendations/ Report Remaining Issues
MAKE
Recommend Subst NO
Compltn Review?
YES

The team
· Review Project
REVIEW Construction
Status P2- % of Reviews Not recommending for
Substantially Substantial Completion
next looked
NO
Complete?
YES

ISSUE

closer how
· Issue SC

· Complete Punchlist Procedures

·
to capture
COMPLETE Request Final Completion
/
REQUEST · Review/Make Recommendations

indicator · Review Project

Construction
REVIEW

data.
Status Q1- Project Variance %
NO
Final Complete?
YES Q2- Project Variance $
COORD.
· Coordinate Final Documentation To Complete Project

COMPLETED Construction Completed

FBC_DMAIC_Story_Reduce Project Variances_Flowchart.vsd 1/11/16

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Cost of Poor Quality of Unwanted Project Variances 9

1. Direct Costs
a. Actual Dollars above Planned Project Costs for 2012-2015
Projects that were over ………………………………………………………………. $1.8 M
Note: This does not include all indirect additional costs of re-works (i.e., labor,
equipment and materials added when the project work activity does not meet
specifications causing re-inspections)

2. Management and Staff Costs

a. Cost of project delays: consultant costs, project manager time,
purchasing department time, department manager time, etc.
(30 days late x $3,000/day x 14 Projects w/ Overruns)………………………….. $1.26 M

Total Hidden Costs were estimated between $1.8M and $3.06M

over the 4-year period analyzed.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Identify Data Collection Needs 10

The team developed a spreadsheet to analyze the construction projects.

Construction Project Status Summary

BCB D E M O G R A P H I C S MILESTONE DATES DURATION OUTCOMES
WHAT WHO WHAT WHERE
AI= AJ= AS='Y' if BB=100*
B F G H I J K L O P Q X Z AB Z-Q 'Y' if AJ<=0 AY AZ BA= (AY-AZ)/AZ
Z>AB AZ-AY

Contract # of
1- 2- 3- Execution Days
Line #

Internal/ Internal/ Outside Contract Initiation Project Target TO Project Project

External Design External CEI Funding Execution Date/ Compl'n Compl'n Project Compltd Project Awarded Actual Dollar % Project
Project Name Project Mgr Dept Contractor Design Consultant CEI Consultant Source Division Date NTP Date Date Completion Late Timely? Amount$ Project Cost Variance Variance
%Internal %Internal Average Days %Y Total $ Avg
43.5 57.1 272.0 61.9 35.7 $17,332,999 $18,127,708 $1,810,646 7%
Q3 Q4 Q5 Q2 Q1
1 Single Stream Recycling Facility - PJS R. Roberts SW Paul Jacquin & Sons External CDM Smith N Eng 11/5/13 3/27/14 10/24/14 11/6/14 353 -13 Y $6,575,327 $7,591,264 $1,015,937 15

2 Lawnwood Baseball Expansion Guy Medor PRF Multiple External Multiple Combination N Reg Parks $1,059,292 $1,440,833 $381,541 36

3 Judicial Complex Security Master Plan Greg White PRF Diebold Incorporated Internal Internal Internal Internal N Facilities 10/11/11 2/16/12 9/30/13 8/19/12 720 407 N $455,353 $653,134 $197,781 43

4 Park & Ride at SLC Aadmin Parking Lot E.Bas PRF Various External N/A Internal N/A Facilities 6/17/14 10/6/14 6/29/15 377 $259,129 $306,364 $47,235 18

5 Shin Rd Emergency Culver Replacement C82 and 83

C. Hauschild PW Johnson-Davis External Kimley Horn External Culpepper&Terpening C09-06-278
N WA
Eng6/7 10/16/12 4/1/12 10/1/13 350 $561,145 $605,549 $44,404 8

6 St James Dr Sidewalk Phase 2 Craig Hauschild PW Melvin Bush External Kimley Horn External Kimley Horn Y Eng 9/18/12 11/4/12 6/8/13 4/8/13 263 61 N $512,774 $546,913 $34,139 7

7 Palomar st @ Lakewood Park Canal E.Bas PW Johnson-Davis Internal Internal N Eng 10/1/13 8/1/13 5/1/14 212 $255,500 $281,693 $26,193 10

8 Orange Ave Box Culver 2.2 Patrick Dayan PW Melvin Bush Internal Internal N Eng $261,498 $285,037 $23,540 9
Orange Ave & NSLRWCD Canal 56 Culvert Patrick Dayan PW Johnson-Davis External Miller Legg Internal N Stormwater 10/23/12 4/1/12 10/1/13 4/26/13 343 158 N $923,280 $945,142 $21,862 2
9
10 Skate Park Restroom - Sidewalk - Drainage Guy Medor PRF Crist Construction Company External Cook & Menard Internal Internal N Reg Parks 8/20/13 2/12/14 9/30/14 6/12/14 406 110 N $62,831 $84,319 $21,488 34

11 NHI WWTF Expansion Ray Murankus UTL Summit Construction External Masteller & Moler External Masteller & Moler N N County 7/1/14 7/16/14 9/28/15 9/14/15 454 14 N $4,426,787 $4,438,132 $11,345 0

12 Christensen Rd at NSLRWCD C102 Shannon Mieras PW Layne Inliner, LLC Internal N/A Internal Dunkelberger N Eng 11/18/14 1/21/15 $139,799 $147,677 $7,878 6

13 Taylor Creek Drainage Phase II Don West PW Dickerson Florida, Inc. External DMC External DMC Y Port 6/3/14 7/15/14 3/31/15 5/16/15 301 -46 Y $2,163,771 $2,170,428 $6,657 0

14 Airport Install REILS Runway 28L John Wiatrak PDS Y Airport 6/15/13 7/16/13 8/30/13 8/2/13 76 28 N $57,555 $63,726 $6,171 11

15 Holiday Pines WWTF Reuse Ray Murankus UTL Summit Construction External Masteller & Moler External Masteller & Moler N N County 2/18/14 3/18/14 4/17/15 3/18/15 423 30 N $659,700 $665,454 $5,754 1

16 Sanberg Lane Culvert Replacement Shannon Mieras PW Johnson-Davis Internal Internal N Eng $60,180 $62,106 $1,926 3
Fairgrounds arena Fans Phase 1 & 2 Summer Ivey-Platt PRF S&W Electric Inc. Big Ass Fans Big Ass Fans N/A N/A N Tourism 2/17/15 2/21/15 5/4/15 6/30/15 76 -57 Y $170,250 $170,250 $0 0
and
17 Venues
18 Pool Resurfacing - Ravenswood / Lincoln Park Mark DiMascio PRF A&G Concrete Pools Internal N Reg Parks 1/6/15 2/2/15 3/2/15 3/6/15 55 -4 Y $175,000 $174,995 -$5 0

19 DJ Wilcox Preserve - Boardwalks Amy Griffin ERD Bayshore Construction External Miller Legg Internal N Env Reg 9/17/13 5/31/13 -109 $148,605 $148,506 -$99 0

20 18601 Orange Ave Culvert Sleeving Shannon Mieras PW Johnson-Davis Internal Internal N Eng $26,595 $26,237 -$358 -1

21 Jenkins Rd Sidewalk Improv C. Hauschild PW Eng 9/30/14 $106,000 $105,552 -$448 0

22 Tradition Baseball Field Renovation Guy Medor PRF Sports Turf One Internal N/A N/A N/A N Reg Parks 10/7/14 11/12/14 12/12/14 12/17/14 66 -5 Y $143,639 $142,454 -$1,185 -1
Header Canal Rd C#75 Culvert Sleeve E.Bas PW Johnson-Davis Internal Internal N Stormwater 3/19/13 3/1/13 10/1/13 196 $44,950 $42,725 -$2,225 -5
23
24 TCERDA Park - R & D M. Harvey ADMIN N TCERDA $3,660,000 $3,656,370 -$3,630 0

25 Lawnwood Track Guy Medor PRF American Athletic Courts Internal Internal Internal Internal N Reg Parks 7/2/13 8/2/13 3/4/14 1/4/14 245 59 N $385,000 $379,000 -$6,000 -2

26 Taxiway D-1 Realignment/Drainage John Wiatrak PDS Mancil's Tractor Service External AECOM External AECOM Y Airport 9/3/13 3/23/14 8/30/14 7/11/14 361 50 N $614,368 $585,114 -$29,255 -5

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Review Selected Indicator 11

GOOD

Average = 7%

GAP

Target = 0%

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Stratify the Problem 12

The team stratified the 26 projects many ways and found…

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Stratify the Problem 13

The team stratified the 11 projects > 5% variance many ways and found…

Problem Statement:
“6 Projects completed during FY 2012 to December 2015 had a
Project Award variance over 5% and total Variance Dollars over
$30,000.”

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Identify Potential Root Causes 14

The team reviewed the 6 projects before conducting Single Case Bore Analysis.
Single Case Bore Analysis
Problem Statement: “6 Projects completed during FY 2012 to Dec 2015 had a Project Award variance over 5% and total
Variance dollars over $30,000.”

3-Judicial 4-Park & Ride 5-Shin Rd

1-Single Stream Complex at SLC Emergency
Recycling 2-Lawnwood Security Aadmin Culver 6-St James

e
ntag
Facility - Baseball Master Parking Replacement Dr Sidewalk
Reasons or Factors

al
PJSVariance=1 ExpansionV PlanVariance LotVariance= C82 and Phase

e
Tot

Perc
015937;Solid ariance=381 =197781;PR 47235.12;PR 83Variance=4 2Variance=34
(that contributed to the Variance $ Waste 540.56;PRF F- F 4404.38;PW- 139;PW

1) Annexation into C of FP X 1 17%

2) Requested change from equipment
X 1 17%
manufacturer

A
3) Field change for operational
X X X X 4 67%
improvements/added project value

4) Field change requested by stakeholder X X X 3 50%

C
5) Field change due to unforeseen conditions X X X X 4 67% B

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Identify Potential Root Causes 15

The team completed Cause and Effect Analysis and found…

A- Field change for operational improvements/added project value (67%)

Added Value Improvement wasn’t identified at design Fishbone
Poor standards to Cause and
identify & involve Project Manager deemed change a benefit to a project
Effect Diagram
C all appropriate AND there were contingency funds available
Problem
stakeholders Project had contingency funds available and
history of previous practices of using up funds Statement
A Policy for vetting and approving optional / “6 Projects
added project value improvements is completed during
inconsistently applied among depts
FY 2012 to
present had a
Stakeholder didn’t Request Change during Design Conditions were not identified
during Project Design Project Award
All Stakeholders weren’t Identified up-front variance over 5%
Condition wasn’t caught during
C Poor standards to identify & involve data and field acquisition and total
all Appropriate stakeholders
Current procedures for data
Variance dollars
Stakeholder involved in Design
acquisitions missed conditions over $30,000.”
Process Requested Change
Project Mgr allowed Current data/field acquisition
D change to be made
B procedures are not adequately
No consistent policy for allowing designed to identify most all
changes after design review finalized conditions
C-Field change requested by B-Field change due to = Potential Root
stakeholder (50%) B unforeseen conditions (67%) Cause

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Verify Root Causes 16

The team collected data to verify the root causes and found….

Root Cause Verification Matrix

Potential Root Cause
Policy for vetting and approving
optional /added project value
A improvements is inconsistently
applied among depts
Current data/field acquisition
procedures are not adequately
B designed to identify most all
conditions
Poor standards to identify &
C involve all Appropriate
stakeholders
No consistent policy for allowing Reviewed Procedures and policies and
changes after design review
D finalized
Root Cause
How Verified?
or Symptom
Reviewed Procedures and policies and
found and nothing in writing was found
Root Cause
Reviewed Procedures and policies and
found and nothing in writing was found
Root Cause
Reviewed Procedures and policies and
found and nothing in writing was found Root Cause
found and nothing in writing was found
Root Cause

…all potential root causes were validated.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
Identify and Select Countermeasures 17

The team brainstormed many countermeasures and narrowed them down

to these for evaluation:
Countermeasures Matrix Legend: 3=Moderately

5=Extremely
2=Somewhat
4=Very 1=Little or
None

Ratings

Effectiveness

Take Action?
Feasibility

Overall

Yes/No
Problem Statement Verified Root Causes Countermeasures
A- Policy for vetting and approving
A1/D1- Create Standard Process for
optional /added project value
"Vetting" proposed field changes 4 4 16 Y
improvements is inconsistently
during construction
applied among depts

B- Current field data acquisition

B1- Establish "Best Practice" field
procedures are not adequately
data acquisition procedures and 4 4 16 Y
designed to identify most all
“6 Projects completed during FY conditions decision support tools
2012 to December 2015 had a
Project Award variance over 5% C1- 3D Construction Plan Version
and total Variance dollars over for better understanding to 3 2 6 N
$30,000.” residents and stakeholders
C2- Create Online Plans of project
C- Poor standards to identify & and make available to residents for 3 4 12 N
involve all appropriate stakeholders comments
C3- Develop Procedure and
Decision Support tool(s) to Identify
4 4 16 Y
and then follow-up with project
affected stakeholders
A1/D1- Create Standard Process for
D- No consistent policy for allowing See above
changes after design review finalized
"Vetting" proposed field changes
during construction
A1 Score

3 countermeasures were identified for implementation.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
Identify Barriers and Aids 18

The team performed Barriers and Aids analysis on the selected Countermeasures.

Barriers
Impact
Forces against Implementation
(H, M, L)
Push Back from county staff with
H 1) culture change
(Supported by Aids: A,B,C, D)
Resources Limited for Training
M 2)
(Supported by Aids: A,B,C,D)
No Champion to advocate for
L 3) change
(Supported by Aid: A)
Aids
Forces For Implementation
A) Management very supportive of efforts
Reduced Project change orders and
B)
resulting Variances
C) Higher satisfaction with stakeholders
Creates uniformity with county depts
D) and increased accountibility for project
related decisions

The team next incorporated this analysis into the team’s Action Plan.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Develop and Implement Action Plan 19

The team implemented an Action Plan for the team’s Countermeasures.

When
2016
HOW WHO Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
1. Develop Countermeasures: (Run Strawmodels by depts for feedback)
John 3/17/16
A1/D1- Create Standard Process for "Vetting" proposed field changes during construction

Matt H./ John / 3/17/16

B1- Establish "Best Practice" field data acquisition procedures and decision support tools Kenney

C3- Develop Procedure and Decision Support tool(s) to Identify and then follow-up with Allison/ Matt B. 3/17/16
project affected stakeholders
2. Secure Management Approval of Countermeasures (identify Champion) Team 3/31/16

3. Communicate/Train SLC Staff in Countermeasures and related policies/procedures Team 6/15/16

(Share Benefits of Countermeasures)
4. Implement Countermeasures Team 6/30/1

5. Monitor Implementation and adjust as necessary Team 6/30//16

6. Establish On-going responsibilities and standardize countermeasures into operations Team On-going

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Countermeasure A1/D1- Create Process for ‘Vetting’ Project Changes 20

The team created a

Project Variance
Review and Approval
Form.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Countermeasure B1-C3 Identify Data Acquisition/ Stakeholders 21

The team developed a Pre-Design Worksheet intended to assist staff to

identify all potential stakeholders and factors that may affect the project design
and construction.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Review Results 22

The team collected indicator data and reviewed results of it’s

countermeasures

GOOD
Counter measures
to be implemented
Spring 2016

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Standardize Countermeasures 23

Manage Construction Projects (Process Owner: Operations Administrator )

WHO PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING & 3RD PARTIES ( INTERNAL
CONTRACTOR INSPECTIONS (CEI) DEPTS/ TESTING, ETC.)
STEP
NEED Need To Manage Project Construction To Meet Awarded Contract

The team: ISSUE · Issue NTP

RECEIVE/
SECURE/ · Receive/Review · Secure Materials And Labor · Conduct Daily Inspections
CONDUCT Construction Docs · Build Project Components · Doc/Report Findings To PM/
· Vet Change Rqsts · Report Progress To PM?CEI Contractor
 Revised REQUEST
W/ Approp Parties
· Request Interim Inspections As Per

indicators and
Schedule
PERFORM/ · Perform Tests And Inspect Construction Components
REPORT
incorporated
· Report Findings To PM And Contractor
NO Components Failed?

the
· Review Testing And Inspection Findings And Take Steps To Resolve
REVIEW YES

P1- % of Components passed per inspection Ready For Substantial NO

improvements
Completion Inspection?
YES
REVIEW/
· Review/Resolve Remaining Issues
into the
REQUEST
· Request Substantial Completion
(SC) Review

Process REVIEW/
MAKE
·
·
Review SC Request & Current Construction Progress
Make Recommendations/ Report Remaining Issues
Recommend Subst NO

flowchart. Compltn Review?

YES

· Review Project
REVIEW Construction
Status P2- % of Reviews Not recommending for
NO Substantially Substantial Completion

Looked to
Complete?
 ISSUE
YES

· Issue SC
standardize · Complete Punchlist Procedures
· Request Final Completion
the Indicator COMPLETE
/
REQUEST · Review/Make Recommendations

monitoring · Review Project

Construction
REVIEW Status Q1- Project Variance %
NO
Final Complete?
YES Q2- Project Variance $
COORD.
· Coordinate Final Documentation To Complete Project

COMPLETED Construction Completed

FBC_DMAIC_Story_Reduce Project Variances_Flowchart_Future State_2-16-16.vsd 2/18/16

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Standardize Countermeasures 24

The team Developed a Process Control System (PCS) to monitor the process on-going.

Process Control System

Process Name: Manage Construction Projects Process Owner: Operations Administrator

Process Customer: Tax Payer, SLC BOCC Critical Customer Requirements: Complete Project on
schedule and plan Dollars
Process Purpose: Complete Project Current Sigma Level: TBD
Outcome Indicators: Q1, Q2
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring
Process Indicators Control Timeframe Contingency Plans /
And Limits Data to Collect (Frequency) Responsibility Misc.
 Actions Required
When to for Exceptions
Specs/ What is Checking Item Collect Who will  Procedure
Quality Indicators Targets or Indicator Calculation Data? Check? References
P1 % of Components passed per TBD 100*(# of Components By TBD Log / Spreadsheet
inspection passed per inspection)/(# of Inspectio
Completed Projects) n
P2 % of Reviews Not TBD 100*(# of Reviews Not By TBD Log / Spreadsheet
recommending for recommending for Inspectio
Substantial Completion Substantial Completion)/(#of n
Completed Projects)
Q1 Project Variance % TBD 100*(Actual $- By TBD Log / Spreadsheet
Planned$)/Planned$ Project
Cmpltn
Q2 Project Variance $ TBD (Actual $-Planned$) By TBD Log / Spreadsheet
Project
Cmpltn

Approved: Date: Rev #: Rev Date:

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Lessons Learned 25

1) Project performance data at SLC is inconsistent and scattered.

2) Project management procedures are inconsistent across departments.

3) Paretos and Histograms were effective tools to stratify the project

information and lead the team to the project variance root causes.

4) Project data needed to be reviewed to ensure accuracy of the information

before analysis.

5) Root causes of all problems are either “Current standards that failed” or
“People failed the current standards”.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Next Steps 26

1) Implement countermeasures
2) Monitor the performance results.

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control