Professional Documents
Culture Documents
e
Analyz
e
Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase
Tollgate Review
Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase
Tollgate Review
Lean Six Sigma Group
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Jack Welch Speaks on the uture o! Six Sigma "y Steven #onacorsi
Lean Six Sigma
DMAIC Tools and
Activities
Val!eAdd Anal)sis
/!ic. 0ins
Statistical Anal)sis
Im"lement 6s Program
Cost7%ene#it Anal)sis
%enchmar.ing
Training
Project Charter
SIP*C Ma"
Project Val!ation7R*IC
Anal)sis Tools
Sta.eholder Anal)sis
Comm!nication Plan
Pareto Anal)sis
Process C)cle
+##icienc)7Little3s Law
*"erational De#initions
Statistical Sam"ling
Meas!rement S)stem
Anal)sis 4MSA5
'age R$R
,a""a St!dies
Control Charts
S"aghetti Diagrams
Histograms
9ormalit) Test
(M+A
H)"othesis Tests7Con#:
Intervals
A9*VA
Com"onents o# Variation
/!e!ing Theor)
Re"lenishment P!ll7,an&an
Stoc.ing Strateg)
Process %alancing
Set!" red!ction
P!gh Matrix
P!ll S)stem
Mista.eProo#ing7
;ero De#ects
Standard *"erating
Proced!res 4S*P3s5
M'PP
Sol!tion Re"lication
Vis!al 0or."lace
Metrics
Develo" *"erational
De#initions
Validate Meas!rement
S)stem
Root ca!se=
+##ect
Root ca!se=
+##ect
Root ca!se=
+##ect
*ne0a) A9*VA
Two0a) A9*VA
Pareto Plots
M!lti"le Regression
Scatter Plots
C$+ Matrix
Com"lexit)
,ai-en7/!ic. 0ins
(M+A
Control7Im"act Chart
TTest
*ther
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
>
Hypothesis Tests Value-Add Analysis
Tools Used Root Cause / Effect
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
+iscoverSim +'A,- -ase Stu&y "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
'ra"hical Anal)sis
S!mmar)
+ata is -ontinuous/ ??? Data Points Collected %etween ??7??7?? and ??7??7??
0ormality -entral Ten&ency 1ariation
9ormal Average Std: Dev 4long term5
9on9ormal Median or /@ or /> S"an 4@7AA5 or
Sta&ilit) (actor 4/@7/>5
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
B
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
+isplay *istograms 2 Process -apa"ility Reports in %xcel "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Sources o! Waste
Waste 34 (5)
0aste CB 4D5
0aste C6 4D5
Prioriti-ed So!rces o# 0aste
01A
+e!ect
6verpro&uction Transportation
Waiting ,nventory 'otion
Area 4
S!& area @
Area 4
S!& area @
Area 4
S!& area @
Processing
Area 4
S!& area @
Area 4
S!& area @
Area 4
S!& area @
< Insert your waste percentage as
shown in pie chart >
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
6
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
The 7 +ea&ly Wastes Training 1i&eo "y Gem"a Aca&emy
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Ca!se and +##ect Matrix
C$+ Matrix 4*"tional5
E
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
F
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
-ause an& %!!ect (.8) 'atrix Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Pareto Plot
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
G
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
How do these
#indings relate to
)o!r "rojectE
9ext Ste"sE
Pareto -hart an& Analysis Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
H)"othesis Test S!mmar)
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
H International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
*ypothesis Tests Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Control 7 Im"act Anal)sis
High Impact Medium Impact Low Impact
In Our
Control
?
In Our
Infuence
?
Out of Our
Control
?
Does the ? have a high1 medi!m1 or low im"act on the "roject IE
D
o
e
s
t
h
e
?
i
n
h
e
t
e
a
m
s
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
1
i
n
#
l
!
e
n
c
e
1
o
r
o
!
t
o
#
t
h
e
i
r
c
o
n
t
r
o
l
E
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
A
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Prioritization Training 1i&eo "y woo&ie99:;
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
/!ic. 0in Doc!mentation
Tem"late
@: Root Ca!se= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
<: *&vio!s Sol!tion= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
>: Low or 9o Cost= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
B: Low Ris.= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
6: Im"lementation Plan= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
F: Sta.eholder4s5 A""roval= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
Process 9ame= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ Process Lead= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
Process *wner= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ Start Date= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
Process Area= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ Sto" Date= JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
%ene#it4s5=
JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
JJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJJ
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
@K
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
A&& 1isual %xample
#e!ore
A&& 1isual %xample
A!ter
%xamples Where <se&
6s
Inventor) Red!ction
MSA Im"rovements
Price red!ctions
Red!ced D*09TIM+
49VA ste"s or wor.5
P!ll S)stem
,ai-en events
$aizen Philosophy Training 1i&eo "y Gem"a Aca&emy
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
%!siness Im"act
T)"e @= Descri&e the chain o# ca!salit) that shows how )o! determined the Direct Cash (low: Tell the stor)
with ca!se $ e##ect relationshi"s1 on how the "ro"osed change sho!ld create the desired #inancial res!lt 4N5 in
)o!r "roject:
T)"e <= Descri&e the chain o# ca!salit) that shows how )o! determined the La&or +##icienc) savings: Tell the
stor) with ca!se $ e##ect relationshi"s on how the change sho!ld create the desired #inancial res!lt 4N5:
Descri&e the T)"e > %!siness Im"act4s5 areas and how these were meas!red 4i:e: Cost7Ris. Avoidance5
*ther /!estions
Sta.eholders agree on the "roject3s im"act and how it will &e meas!red in #inancial termsE
0hat ste"s were ta.en to ens!re the integrit) $ acc!rac) o# the dataE
,e) actions
com"leted
Iss!es
Lessons learned
Comm!nications1
team &!ilding1
organi-ational
activities
@>
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
'anage Stakehol&er %xpectations Training 1i&eo "y pro>ectmanagervi&eos
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
9ext Ste"s
,e) actionsE
/!estions to answerE
+x"enses
Reven!es
Phase Com"letions
Tollgate Reviews
Tollgate Sche&ule& Revise& -omplete
De#ine= ??7??7?? ??7??7??
Meas!re= ??7??7?? ??7??7?? ??7??7??
Anal)-e= ??7??7?? ??7??7?? ??7??7??
Im"rove= ??7??7?? ??7??7?? ??7??7??
Control= ??7??7?? ??7??7?? ??7??7??
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
@G
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Pro>ect -harter Training 1i&eo "y +arrell Rogers
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Meas!re *verview
-TA/ E
P-%5/ E
+P'6 4d5= E
Root ca!se=
/!ic. 0in C@
Root ca!se=
Root ca!se=
MSA
%asic Statistics
Process Ca"a&ilit)
Histograms
Pro&a&ilit) Plot
Pareto Anal)sis
*"erational De#:
6s
P!ll
Control Charts
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
@H
Process Capability Graphical Analysis
Tools Used Root Cause / &uic' (in
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Process -apa"ility Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
@A
Anal)-e
Tollgate Chec.list
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 recreation of the process? Has the decision been
confirmed with the Project Sponsor?
Has the team investigated and validated or de!validated" the root cause
hypotheses generated earlier, to gain confidence that the #vital few$ root causes
have been uncovered?
%oes the team understand why the problem the &uality, 'ycle (ime or 'ost
)fficiency issue identified in the Problem Statement" is being seen?
Has the team been able to identify any additional *&uick +ins,?
Have learning,s to!date re-uired modification of the Project 'harter? .f so, have
these changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the /ey Stakeholders?
Have any new risks to project success been identified, added to the 0isk
1itigation Plan, and a mitigation strategy put in place?
Tollgate
Review
Tollgate
Review
S
to
"
Deliverables:
Lit of !otential Root caue
!rioriti"ed Lit of #alidated
Root Caue
$dditional %&uic' (in)* if
applica+le
Re,ned Charter* a necear-
.pdated Ri' Mitigation !lan
Delivera&les Q"loaded to Central
Storage Location or De"lo)ment
Management S)stem
Has the team identi#ied the .e) #actors 4critical ?3s5 that have the &iggest
im"act on "rocess "er#ormanceE Have the) validated the root ca!sesE
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Analyze Phase Success -riteria Training 1i&eo "y e&ucatevirtually
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
<K
Lean Six Sigma
DMAIC Im"rovement Process
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
S
to
"
Defne
Defne
Measur
e
Measur
e
Analyze
Analyze
Improv
e
Improv
e
Control
Control
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
S
to
"
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
S
to
"
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
To
llg
a
te
R
e
v
ie
w
S
to
"
Develo" sol!tions
lin.ed to critical x3s
Im"lement
sol!tions $
control "lan
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
+'A,- Pro>ect 6verview using +iscoverSim "y Sigma.L?com
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Im"rove
Tollgate Chec.list
Tollgate
Review
Tollgate
Review
S
to
"
/elivera+le0
!rioriti"ed Lit of 1olution
%To23e) #alue 1tream
Map45
!ilot !lan 6 Reult
$pproved 1olution and
/etailed Implementation
!lan
$dditional %&uic' (in)* if
applica+le
Re,ned Charter* a
necear-
.pdated Ri' Mitigation
!lan
Delivera&les Q"loaded to
Central Storage Location or
De"lo)ment Management
S)stem
+hat narrowing and screening techni-ues were used to further develop and -ualify
potential solutions?
%o proposed solutions address all the identified root causes, at least the most critical?
+ere the solutions verified with the Project Sponsor and Stakeholders? Has an
approval been received to implement?
+as a pilot run to test the solution? +hat was learned? +hat modifications made?
Has the team seen evidence that the root causes of the initial problems have been
addressed during the pilot? +hat are the expected benefits?
Has the team considered potential problems and unintended conse-uences 21)3" of
the solution and developed preventive and contingency actions to address them?
Has the proposed solution been documented, including process participants, job
descriptions and if applicable, their estimated time commitment to support the process?
Has the team been able to identify any additional *&uick +ins,?
Have *learning4s, to!date re-uired modification of the Project 'harter? .f so, have
these changes been approved by the Project Sponsor and the /ey Stakeholders?
Have any new risks to project success been identified and added to the 0isk 1itigation
Plan?
<@
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
,mprove Phase Success -riteria Training 1i&eo "y e&ucatevirtually
Has the team develo"ed im"rovement sol!tions #or the critical ?3s1 "iloted
the sol!tion and veri#ied that the sol!tion will solve the "ro&lemE
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
R!n Charts
4*"tional5
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
<<
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Run -hart Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Scatter Plot
4*"tional5
Average Expenses decrease
as Sales Increase
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
<>
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Scatter Plot Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Linear Regression
4*"tional5
A6D con#ident that AB:@D o# the variation in L0ait TimeM is #rom the L/t) o# DeliveriesM
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
<B International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
'ultiple Regression Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
6K BK >K <K @K K
Im"rove Data
Dot"lot o# Im"rove Data
4with Ho and A6D tcon#idence interval #or the mean5
S T
?
J
Ho
*neSam"le TTest
and Dot Plot 4*"tional5
We Are 95% Confident The Improve
Mean Is Not Statisticall !ifferent
6neBSample T/ ,mprove +ata
Test of mu = 30 vs mu not = 30
Variable N Mean StDev SE Mean
Improve Data 30 28.10 12.! 2.2"
Variable #!.0$ %I T &
Improve Data '23.!( 32."!) *0.8 0.10
This Dot Plot gra"hicall) dis"la)s A6D
con#idence intervals that the data will #all
&etween <>:B6 and ><:G6 #or res"onse
time 4see the red &rac.ets and red line5: It
also indicates that the Mean 4Red ?5 is at
<H:@: The &l!e Ho mar.s the Target Mean:
The test statistic1 T1 #or Ho= mean U >K is calc!lated
as VK:HB: The PVal!e o# this test1 or the "ro&a&ilit)
o# o&taining more extreme val!e o# the test statistic
&) chance i# the n!ll h)"othesis was tr!e1 is K:B@K
4W K:K65: This is called the attained signi#icant level1
or PVal!e: There#ore1 Acce"t Ho1 which means we
concl!de that the Im"rove data set mean 4<H:@5 is
9*T di##erent than the Target mean 4>K5:
*ypothesis Test/
Is the Im"rove data set mean
di##erent #rom the Target Mean
o# >K min!tesE
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
<6
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
TwoBSample TBTest Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
Test #or +8!al Variance
4*"tional5
The s"read o# the
data is statistical
greater #or
com"leting the
"a)roll #orm than
the Antenna time
trac.ing:
Test #or +8!al
Variance Con#irms
Pa)roll In"!t T)"e
C)cle Time is
Signi#icant
%nter $ey Sli&e Take Away ($ey Point) *ere
<F
International Standards #or Lean Six Sigma 4ISLSS5
Test !or %Cual 1ariance Training 1i&eo "y Sigma.L
@6K @KK 6K K
A6D Con#idence Intervals #or Sigmas
Antenna
Pa)roll
GK FK 6K BK >K <K @K K
%ox"lots o# Raw Data
Total Ti me
PVal!e = K:KKK
Test Statistic= <@:K6B
LeveneXs Test
PVal!e = K:KK@
Test Statistic= K:@KH
(Test
(actor Levels
Pa)roll
Antenna
Test #or +8!al Variances #or Total Time
Analyz
e
Analyz
e
9
o
P
a
r
t
P
a
r
t
K
6K
@KK
@6K
Part79o Part
9
e
t
H
o
!
r
s
C
a
l
l
*
"
e
n
%ox"lots o# 9et Ho!r &) Part79o
4means are indicated &) solid circles5
Analysis of Variance for Net Hour
Sour+e D, SS MS , &
&art-No 1 "21 "21 8..! 0.00
Error .# !#1# 8!8
Total "0 ...1!
In/ivi/ual #!$ %I0s ,or Mean
1evel N Mean StDev **2*********2*********2*********2****
No &art 2" 21.## 1#.#! '********3*********)
&art 3.0! 33."0 '******3******)
**2*********2*********2*********2****
&oole/ StDev = 2#.2# 12 2 3. 8
*ne 0a) A9*VA
4*"tional5
inex!s= htt"=77www:inex!s:com
Sigma?L= htt"=77www:sigmaxl:com
P+? 9etwor. $ I/PC Lean Six Sigma $ Process +xcellence #or Contin!o!s Im"rovement