Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
DMAIC Analysis on Purdue Travel Procedure CONCUR User Integration Improvement Poster
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

DMAIC Analysis on Purdue Travel Procedure CONCUR User Integration Improvement Poster

  • 44 views
Published

Six sigma undergraduate project using the DMAIC methodology. Completed after performing a Process audit (PEMM)

Six sigma undergraduate project using the DMAIC methodology. Completed after performing a Process audit (PEMM)

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

Views

Total Views
44
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
2
Comments
0
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. DMAIC Analysis on Purdue Travel Procedure CONCUR User Integration Improvement Project Charter Background Since January 2013, the Central Travel Office has replaced the paperwork process with CONCUR Travel and Expense across Purdue University, including regional campuses. CONCUR is the leading provider of integrated travel and expense management solutions. In conjunction with ALTOUR travel agency and the introduction of JP Morgan Chase Visa travel card, CONCUR intended to provide automated booking, authorization, and reimbursement processes, thus eliminating Form 17 and Form 25, which were previously required in the paperwork process. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the Central Travel Office, including Gayle Stetler for their generous assistance with the project support. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. Ragu Athinarayanan, Debbie Tutak, and Dr. Chad Laux from the TLI department for their support. Last but not least, we thank Emily Haygood and Steven Cain for their insightful inputs for our project. Measure In the previous paperwork system, the baseline performance of the Reimbursement Preparation Process (comparable to Expense Report in CONCUR System) was measured by interviewing processors and managers in Business Office and Central Travel Office. The process time was estimated to be 78 hours while the lead time ranged from 11 to 28 days. VSM – Paperwork Process Jason D. Widgery, Weng Kwong Chan, Kevin Chang Technology, Leadership and Innovation, College of Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN Frequency 128 56 1 11516322871124 858 807 634 210 199 Percent 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.070.610.7 5.2 4.0 3.8 3.0 1.0 0.9 Cum % 99.7100.0100.0100.070.681.3 86.5 90.5 94.3 97.2 98.2 99.1 Exceptions Allocation Required Account Assignm ent Fare Class Hospitality AND Allow ance M ileage Rental Car Class Car Rental Preferred Vendor EXP > TR Contra Expense Trip Request M issing Duplicate Entry > 60 days old 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 100 80 60 40 20 0 Frequency Percent Pareto Chart of Exceptions for 2013 403020100 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 403020100 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 ECET Approval (Days) ApprovedAmount MET TLI Panel variable: Department Scatter plot of Appr oved Amount vs Appr oval ( Days) Betw een Jan 2 7, 2013 and Nov 27, 2013 Relationship between Approved Amount and Approval(days) from CoT Department VSM – CONCUR Process Data Analysis Improvements Increased training level (for both travelers and delegates) Educate users about exceptions to reduce exception occurrences and audit rejections Step-by-step instructions Develop a cleaner user interface and intuitive features Reorganize online resources, making them more accessible Make use of CONUS reporting services in the Central Travel Office to evaluate the performance of CONCUR Enhance SAP integration to simplify account assignment in the expense report 30.022.515.07.50.0-7.5 LSL USL LSL 0.04 Target * USL 7 Sample Mean 5.92553 Sample N 94 StDev (Within) 5.90413 StDev (Ov erall) 5.88828 Process Data Cp 0.20 CPL 0.33 CPU 0.06 Cpk 0.06 Pp 0.20 PPL 0.33 PPU 0.06 Ppk 0.06 Cpm * Ov erall Capability Potential (Within) Capability PPM < LSL 127659.57 PPM > USL 287234.04 PPM Total 414893.62 Observ ed Performance PPM < LSL 159418.56 PPM > USL 427796.89 PPM Total 587215.44 Exp. Within Performance PPM < LSL 158768.11 PPM > USL 427604.68 PPM Total 586372.79 Exp. Ov erall Performance Within Ov erall Process Capabilit y of Approval (Days) Bet ween Jan 27, 2013 and Nov 27, 2013 TLI Department