Lean Six sigma lean project for escalation Management by Advance Innovation Group

  • 1,603 views
Uploaded on

(http://advanceinnovationgroup.com) …

(http://advanceinnovationgroup.com)

This Lean Six Sigma Project done by student from Advance Innovation group which is posted to provide for benchmarking and best practices sharing purposes.

This is a Student project on Escalation Management for E- Commerce, submitted for Six Sigma Certification.

Additionally, it is advisable that you also visit and subscribe Advance Innovation Group Blog (http://advanceinnovationgroup.com/blog) for more Lean Six Sigma Project, Case Studies on Lean Six Sigma, Lean Six Sigma Videos, Lean Six Sigma Discussions, Lean Six Sigma Jobs etc.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,603
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Six Sigma Lean project For Escalation Matrix – E Commerce
  • 2. Customer Customer Comments Customer (CTQ)Project Owner – VP Ops“The objective is to minimize process levelvariations, raising the overall productivity of theprocess without compromising on qualityparameters.Improvement in processproductivityReduce variationsQualityMentor – Sr. Manager I am looking towards a productivity improvement .This project will lead to increasing theproductivity/efficiency/agent utilization/clientsatisfactionImprovement in productivityClient satisfactionEfficiencyBD utilizationUnderstanding VOC
  • 3. Project Leader:AAAAA Team MembersBusiness Case:ABC is the fastest growing E-Commerce company in India.ABC Online Services Private Limited Operates online bookstores which offers books in all the categories. The companywas founded in 2007. The company’s productivity takes thehit when the customer asks for the product, however its notavailable in the inventory or nor we as a team is able toprocure it in the committed SLA.Project Owner Vice PresidentMentor Senior ManagerBB AAAAATeam Member’s JKLK, FTYY, DHHUAProblem Statement:We have observed from the past few months data that theprocess for escalation matrix is not defined due to which weare unable to capture the procurement % & the productivity ofthe BD’s.Goal Statement:To reduce daily escalation count to 50 by the end of April 2012Project In Scope:1. . BD Team BooksProject Out of Scope:1. Rest of the BMVG TeamTimelines/Milestones/PhasesStart Date End DateStart date: 19th Dec 2011 -DEFINE 26th Dec 2011 03nd Jan 2012MEASURE 06- Jan 2011 02-Mar-2012ANALYZE 03-Mar-2012 26-Mar-2012IMPROVE 27-Mar-2012 1-Apr-2012CONTROL 02-Apr-2012 21-Apr-2012Project Charter - Define
  • 4. Key Stakeholders ARMI WorksheetDefine Measure Analyze Improve ControlChampion I & A I & A I & A I & A I & AMentor A & I A & I A & I A & I A & IXXXX R & M R & M R & M R & M R & MTeam Members M M M M MA – Approval of team decisions I.e., sponsor, business leader, MBB.R – Resource to the team, one whose expertise, skills, may be needed on an ad-hoc basis.M – Member of team – whose expertise will be needed on a regular basis.I – Interested party, one who will need to be kept informed on direction, findings.Communication PlanInformation Or Activity Target Audience Information Channel Who WhenProject Status Leadership E-mails XXX BI-WeeklyTollgate Review BB,LBB,MBB &ChampionE-mails or Meetings XXX As per Project PlanProject Deliverables orActivitiesMembers Emails, Meetings XXX WeeklyARMI and Communication Plan - Define
  • 5. HighRevenueSupplierperformanceBrandingCustomersatisfactionCustomersatisfactionStock reportfulfillmentDelivery TATEscalationCountUnderstanding VOCUnderstanding VOC
  • 6. SuppliersSuppliers InputsInputs Process OutputsProcess Outputs CustomersCustomersSSSS IIII PPPP OOOO CCCCNo Of ProcurementNo Of Procurement CustomerCustomerDataDataCPTCPTHELPDESK bifurcatingdataProcurement practice byRegion BDCPT sends EscalationDataRegional RPT’sSIPOC
  • 7. Customer placed an orderAvailable In StockPacked &ShippedReaches tocustomerAssign Sourcethrough ERPERP Assign WHEscalateTo BDNotProcuredProcuredPacked &shippedReachesto custEscalation Process (As Is)
  • 8. Project-Y Operational Definition Defect DefPerformanceStdSpecification LimitOpportunityLSL USLImprovement InEscalation ProcessEscalation is the no of titleswhich have not been procuredwithin defined TAT( Pls referClause for SLA & TAT)Any day whereno: of escalationis greater than 5050 in a day50 in a daydailyProject-Y Data TypeData ItemsNeededFormula tobe usedUnitPlan to collect DataPlan tosampleWhatDatabase orContainer willbe used torecord thisdata?Is this anexistingdatabaseor new?If new,When willthedatabase beready foruse?When is theplanned startdate for datacollection?ImprovementIn EscalationProcessDiscreteStatus ofTotal Titlescount Excel No 04 Jan 2012 05 Jan 20126thFeb to14th AprilData collection plan
  • 9. Validation Measurement System -Effectiveness & EfficiencyEffectiveness = Total no of times operator Agree * 100Total # of observation=52/57*100= 91.22effectivenessEfficiency & Effectiveness is successful, hence the data is allright for further analysis
  • 10. Capability AnalysisZ bench of our existing process is -1.22. Our process is creating almost 885 defectthat’s too high.
  • 11. StabilityThis shows that datais free fromClustering, Trends,Mixture & OscillationTake away: Patterns suggest that the data is stable & Random for further analysis
  • 12. NormalityAim: Data is Not Normal, My median is 66.50, Q3 is 78.25 Normality: P value: 0.005 Shape: Non-Normal Measure of central tendency :data isnon-normal - measure of centraltendency will be median = 66.50Null and alternate hypothesisHO – Data is normalHA – Data is non normal
  • 13. Customer willbrowseFlipkart.comCustomer will searchfor the productIf Available,customer will placean orderERP assigns thesupplier as peravailabilityRegional RPT willraise the PO for theassigned supplierProductavailable withsupplierSupplier will supplywithin SLA towarehouseWarehouse willpack & ship theorderYesRequest toprocure from diffregional RPTNoEscalate To BDIt leads towaiting, overproductionEscalation Process After Analysis
  • 14. VA and NVA Analysis
  • 15. Waste Analysis
  • 16. In StockEscalation Process After AnalysisStart Cust Placed anorderAvailable In StockERP AssignSupplierProcuredNotAvailablePacked &shippedReaches tocustERP AssignWHPacked &ShippedReaches tocustomerDBS titlesshould notcome inescalationCust Placean orderSinglesourceshould go torespectiveRPTFirst SourceOOS shouldgo to DelOpen SourceEscalate ToBDProcuredYesNoOrderCancelStop
  • 17. Improvement ValidationThis shows that Post improvement 75% data is able to achieve the target.
  • 18. Improvement ValidationTest and CI for Two-Sample Poisson Rates: Pre,PostTotal Rate ofVariable Occurrences N OccurrencePre 3593 57 63.0351Post 579 15 38.6000Difference = rate(Pre) - rate(Post)Estimate for difference: 24.435195% CI for difference: (20.6756, 28.1945)Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = 12.74 P-Value= 0.000Exact Test: P-Value = 0.000Test and CI for One-Sample Poisson Rate: PostTest of rate = 50 vs rate not = 50Total Rate of ExactVariable Occurrences N Occurrence 95% CI P-ValuePost 579 15 38.6000 (35.5195, 41.8761) 0.000There is significant difference (+ve)between tagret i.e 50and our realescalation counts. That shows,statistically we have met our targetAbove test shows that there has been significant improvement in escalation countsand our process has met target
  • 19. Control PlanFMEAPeriodicity of review 1stof every month, Escalations if any routed back to BB incharge.
  • 20. Post Improvement CapabilityPost improvement z bench of our process has gone up to 1.03. now our process is justcreating approximately 205 defects.
  • 21. Control Chart Post Improvement PerformanceAbove control chart shows our process performance has improved significantly and it isunder control
  • 22. Validation Of Goal StatementTest and CI for One-Sample Poisson Rate: Escalation CountTest of rate = 50 vs rate not = 50Total Rate of ExactVariable Occurrences N Occurrence 95% CI P-ValueEscalation Count 579 15 38.6000 (35.5195, 41.8761) 0.000"Length" of observation = 1.P-Value below 0.05 signifies that our escalation count on daily basis is significantly lower than our target(i.e. 50). So we conclude that our project has met its goal statement.P-value below 0.05 signifies that our escalation count on daily basis is significantlylower than our target( i.e 50), so we conclude that our project has met its goal statement