1.
05/14/1311ProjectProject Daily C SAT improvementDaily C SAT improvementMethodologyMethodology DMAICDMAICBlack Belt ProjectBlack Belt ProjectClientClient InternalInternalProcessProcess Inbound ProcessInbound ProcessPrelude

2.
05/14/132 05/14/132C SAT – PerformancePREDMAICProcess has not been able to meet the monthly C SAT targetfor the last three months.

3.
05/14/133 05/14/133C SAT – TRENDPREDMAICMonthly C SAT is decreasing continuously. Overall decreasefrom August to October is 26%.

4.
05/14/134 05/14/134C SAT - Result wise bifurcationPREDMAIC54% customers in the last 3 months are not happy with theservice provided by process.54%

5.
05/14/135 05/14/135C SAT RESULT - TRENDPREDMAICOverall increase from August toOctober is 350%.Overall increase from August toOctober is 238%.Decrease of 290% from September toOctoberNot a single Highly satisfiedcustomer in October.

6.
05/14/136Customer Sample CommentsKey output characteristicsimportant to customer (CTQs)Mr. XYZ– GM QualityImprove the process quality so thatour customers receive a world classserviceProcess qualityC SATStakeholdersWe have lost 50,000 customer in thelast 3 months out of which 30,000were repeat customers. We arespending Hugh in product marketingbut this will only help if ourcustomers are happy.C SAT customer retentionGM - call centerCall volume is continuouslydecreasing. What can be done ?Improve process quality and makethe customer happy (c sat)Customerwe are not happy with the serviceprovided by call centerC satUnderstanding VOC DefinePost capturing voice of the above, we identified that improvingcustomer satisfaction is everyone’s need. There fore, our focus CTQ is CSAT.

7.
05/14/137 05/14/137DMAIC

8.
05/14/138Project Progress OverviewD2. Approve Project M1. CTQCharacteristics&StandardsM2. Measurement SystemAnalysisM3. Data CollectionA1. Baseline ProcessA2. PerformanceObjectiveA3. Identify Drivers ofVariationI1. Screen for Vital XsI2. Screen for vital XsI3. Define ImprovedProcessC1. MSA on XsC2. Improved ProcessCapabilityC3. Establish Control PlanKey Deliverables:• List of Customer(s)and Project CTQs• Team Charter• High Level ProcessMap (COPIS)• CAP Plan (Optional)• Preliminary CBA, ifapplicable• Process Capacity• QFD / CTQ Tree• Operationaldefinition,Specificationlimits, target,defect definitionfor Project Y(s)• Data CollectionPlan• MeasurementSystem Analysis• Baseline ofCurrent ProcessPerformance• Normality Test• Statistical GoalStatement forProject• List ofStatisticallySignificant Xs• List of Vital FewXs• TransferFunction(s)• Optimal Settingsfor Xs• ConfirmationRuns/Results• Tolerances onVital Few Xs• MSA Results on Xs• Post ImprovementCapability• StatisticalConfirmation ofImprovements• Process ControlPlan• Process OwnerSignoff• Final CBA, ifapplicableTollgates:PlannedCompleted10/02/2013 01/03/2013 15/03/2013 31/03/2013 06/04/201328/02/201314/03/201330/03/201305/04/201310/04/2013Steps:Tools:  Survey Focus Groups Interviews ARMI, StakeholderAnalysis In/Out of Frame Threat vs.Opportunity Matrix Other ______________ Fishbone Data CollectionPlan Continuous GageR&R Attribute Gage R&R Sample SizeCalculator Other ______________ Basic Statistics Histogram Dot Plots Box and Whisker Plots Run Charts Normality Testing Continuous/DiscreteZst, Zlt Benchmarking Detailed ProcessMapping Moments of Truth Nature of Work Flow of Work Fishbone Hypothesis Testing Regression Analysis Other ______________ DOE Pugh Matrix New ProcessMapping FMEA on newprocess Process Modeling /Simulation Other ______________ Continuous GaugeR&R Discrete Gauge R&R Control Charts Hypothesis Testing CAP Plan Control Plan Other ______________Define MeasureMeasure Analyze Improve ControlOverview

9.
05/14/139Improvementof DAILY CSAT PERAGENTCTQsImprove the daily C SAT for theAgents (Project Y)Improve the daily C SAT for theAgents (Project Y)80%(Lower specification limit)80%(Lower specification limit)Any day the C SAT per agent shouldnot be less than 80% otherwise itwill be considered as a defectiveday(defect)Improve the daily C SAT per agent to80% and above(target)Improve the daily C SAT per agent to80% and above(target)C SAT score received of the day for an agent × 100 >= 80%Maximum C SAT score that can be achievedCTQ Tree DefineDaily c sat per agent(opportunity)

10.
05/14/1310In Scope:Call Certers at both Noida and Bangalore locationOut of Scope:All other Departments and centersBusiness Case:ABC EnterprisesPvt Ltd. is a leading directional media company, whichwas the pioneer of Yellow pages in India. It also has other products inits table like the Classifieds Business for which it again is the pioneerin India. It has Voice / Mobile / Online and Print centric products thatcater to B2B and B2B consumers.This Project is centered on the efficiency area of the Voice Product ofGETIT.The problem faced is that customers are not happy with the servicesprovided by call centers.Problem Statement:On Analyzing the daily data of C SAT for each associate for the last 3months, it is understood that 54% of the total customers are unhappywith the services provided by Call Center. This has resulted into 18%decrease in the call volume.As the Call Cetner operates on the business model of pay per call. Theabove has resulted into less revenue with same cost.Therefore, its very critical that this issue is addressed on priority to runour business process effectively with increased profitability.Goal Statement:This project targets to improve the daily C SAT per agent to 80% by 31stmarch’13.DefineProject CharterTarget DatePre DMAIC 10 Feb,12Define 15thFeb, 13Measure 1stMar,13Analyze 15thMar,13Improve 6th Apr,13Control 10thapr,13High Level Project PlanProject TeamSponsor – Sidharth GuptaChampion – Ashish KohliMBB – Amarjot Singh BrarMentor – Sandeep DhasmanaGB – Baljinder SinghAssitant Manager (Noida) – Abu ZeeshanHaiderAssitant Manager (Bangalore) – Udaybhaskar

11.
05/14/1311Stakeholder Analysis & Communication PlanKey Stakeholder Define Measure Analyze Improve ControlSidharth Gupta I I I A IAshish Kohli I/R I/R I/R M MAmarjot Singh Brar A A A M ASandeep Dhasmana M R M R RBaljinder Singh M M M M MAbu Zeeshan Haider M M M M MUday Bhaskar M M M M MTraining head i i i i mAA – Approval of teams decision outside their charter / authorities, i.e.SponsorRR – Resource of the team, the one whose expertise may be needed on airregular / adhoc basisMM – Member of the team, with the authority & periphery of the charterII – Interested party, one who needs to kept informed on the findings &directions, if inthe later phase found to be as a worthy outcomeCommunicationCommunication planplanMessage Audience Medium Responsibility WhenProjectupdateProject Team, Champions, mentor E MailSandeepDhasmanaWeekly FridayProjectTollgateProject Team, Champions,Stakeholders, Sponsors mentorConferencecallsAt the end of eachProject phaseProjectReviewChampions, MBB, MentorConferencecallsAd hocDefine

12.
05/14/1312SIPOC Define

13.
05/14/1313Process Flow DefineProject y

14.
05/14/1314Data Collection PlanKPI Operational Definition Defect DefPerformanceStdSpecification LimitOpportunityLSL USLc sat per Agent perdayScore given by the customeron the service provided by anagent per dayIf the daily CSAT for anagent is lessthan 80%80% 80% naTo increasethe dailyC SAT scoreper agent to80%KPIDataTypeData ItemsNeededUnitPlan to collect DataPlan tosampleWhat Databaseor Containerwill be used torecord thisdata?Is this anexistingdatabase ornew?If new,When willthedatabase beready foruse?When is theplannedstart datefor datacollection?c sat per agentper dayDiscreteTotal Number ofcalls in the lastthree monthsthat have aC SAT score ofless than 80%% Excel sheet Existing NA 01 nov-12Monitor theDaily agentC SAT ReportMeasure

15.
05/14/1315Effectiveness & EfficiencyFor the purpose of data validation, 120 data points provided byOperations Team have been re-verified for the time taken.Procedure Used:• 120 random samples picked up from 219 data points. The sampleshave been randomly taken from CTI (Computer TelephonyIntegration)Team• On verification, we found that 6 data points were differentlycaptured in 120 samples that were re-verified.Effectiveness % = Number of samples where both measurement were similar* 100Total Number of samples under consideration= 114 * 100 = 95%120For the purpose of data validation, 120 data points provided byOperations Team have been re-verified for the time taken.Procedure Used:• 120 random samples picked up from 219 data points. The sampleshave been randomly taken from CTI (Computer TelephonyIntegration)Team• On verification, we found that 6 data points were differentlycaptured in 120 samples that were re-verified.Effectiveness % = Number of samples where both measurement were similar* 100Total Number of samples under consideration= 114 * 100 = 95%120Effectiveness at 95% with 120 samples is acceptable as per theindustry norm, therefore we conclude that the measurementSystem is adequate.Measure

16.
05/14/1316Graphical Summary Measure9075604530MedianMean7170696867661st Quartile 57.430Median 69.0463rd Quartile 80.189Maximum 98.45066.138 70.48766.572 70.25914.927 18.017A-Squared 0.43P-Value 0.309Mean 68.313StDev 16.326Variance 266.534Skew ness -0.275222Kurtosis -0.084578N 219Minimum 18.657Anderson-Darling Normality Test95% Confidence I nterv al for Mean95% Confidence I nterv al for Median95% Confidence I nterv al for StDev9 5 % Conf idence I nt er v alsSummar y for CSAT Scor eThere is too much variation in the system, C SAT varies from 18.657% to 98.450%.25% data point between 18.657% & 57.430% (Min to Q1), while Median is 69.046%.25% data points between 69.046% & 80.189%Above states that 75% of data points are defects if we are considering 80% as thetarget.Objective : Need to move Daily C SAT score to 80% (Centering)DatapointsattheleftofthegreenlinearedefectsDatapointsattheleftofthegreenlinearedefects

17.
05/14/1317Process Capability Measureopportunities 219defects 162DPMO 739726Sigma Level 0.86Sigma level of the process is poor, there is an urgent need toimprove the process capability

18.
05/14/1318Identifying Potential Causes XsAnalyzeS No.PotentialCauseOperational DefinitionDataTypeTest of beperformed1 Team LeaderThe process owner, who is responsible for managing theperformance of a set of associates in a given shiftDiscrete Chi square2Monthly HoldTimeTotal number of hours spend by an associate in puttingcalls on hold for a monthContinuous BLR3 Shift Timing Type of shift done by an associate for a day Discrete Chi square4 Gender The sex of an individual associate logged in to take calls Discrete Chi square5Monthly AverageRinging TimeAverage number of hours of calls ringing for a month Continuous BLR6Their respectiveage as on1/10/11The number of years an individual associate is old in his /her span of life as on 1sr Oct,2011Continuous BLR7 Marital Status Married or un married Discrete Chi square8 Experience No. of years of prior working of an associate Discrete Chi square9 TenureThe time in months / years which an individual associatehas spent in the particular processDiscrete Chi Square10 Education Level of education an associate has received Discrete Chi square11Monthly LoginHoursMonthly time on system of an associate Continuous BLRData is NonnormalData is NonnormalY is discreteY is discrete Centering IssueCentering Issue

19.
05/14/1319Impact of team leaders on daily csat analyzeThough as per P value , TeamLeaders do not have a significantimpact on C SAT however we can seeno one is achieving the desiredtarget.In this scenario, we will ignore Pvalue and consider Team Leaders asa vital X.

20.
05/14/1320Impact of Monthly Hold Time on daily csatanalyzeP value suggests that Monthly HoldTime does not have a significant onDaily C SAT.Also as per bar chart, there is notmuch of difference in Fail & Passhold status.We will not consider monthly holdtime as a vital X

21.
05/14/1321Impact of Shift Timings on daily csatanalyzeBoth P value & bar chart suggeststhat shift timings does not have asignificant on Daily C SAT.We will not consider SHIFT as avital X

22.
05/14/1322Impact of gender on daily csat analyzeP value suggests that Gender has asignificant on Daily C SAT.Bar chart clearly suggests thatfemale are better performers thanmaleWe will consider gender as a vital X

23.
05/14/1323Impact of Monthly average ringing Time on daily csatanalyzeBoth P value & Bar chart suggests thatmonthly average ringing time does nothave a significant on Daily C SAT.We will not consider monthly averageringing time as a vital X

24.
05/14/1324Impact of age on daily csat analyzeBoth P value & Bar chart suggests thatage does not have a significant onDaily C SAT.We will not consider age as a vital X

25.
05/14/1325Impact of Marital status on daily csatanalyzeBoth P value & Bar chart suggests thatmarital status does not have asignificant on Daily C SAT.We will not consider marital status asa vital X

26.
05/14/1326Impact of Experience on daily csat analyzeBoth P value & Bar chart suggests thatexperience does not have a significanton Daily C SAT.We will not consider experience as avital X

27.
05/14/1327Impact of Tenure on daily csat analyzeP value suggests that tenure has a significant onDaily C SAT.Bar chart clearly suggests that associates withthe tenure of 0-1 years are performing better thanthe one with tenure of 2-3 years & 3 yearsrespectivelyWe will consider tenure as a vital X

28.
05/14/1328Impact of Education on daily csat analyzeP value suggests that education has a significanton Daily C SAT.Bar chart clearly suggests that graduates areperforming better than post graduates & graduatesWe will consider education as a vital X

29.
05/14/1329Impact of Monthly login hours on daily csatanalyzeBoth P value & Bar chart suggests thatmonthly login hours does not have asignificant on Daily C SAT.We will not consider monthly loginhours as a vital X

30.
05/14/1330Evaluation of xs impacting yAnalyzeS No.PotentialCauseData Type Test of be performed P Value1 Team Leader Discrete Chi squareP value is ignored & teamleader is considered as avital x2Monthly HoldTimeContinuous BLR 0.7553 Shift Timing Discrete Chi square 0.3774 Gender Discrete Chi square 0.0005Monthly AverageRinging TimeContinuous BLR 0.6576Their respectiveage as on1/10/11Continuous BLR 0.4207 Marital Status Discrete Chi square 0.4758 Experience Discrete Chi square 0.6309 Tenure Discrete Chi Square 0.00010 Education Discrete Chi square 0.00011Monthly LoginHoursContinuous BLR 0.298

31.
05/14/1331Results of validation of potential X’s impacting CSATS No. Potential Cause1 Team Leader2 Gender3 Tenure4 EducationImprove

32.
05/14/1332Hire new team leadersHire Graduates from outside the companyCreate vertical,opportunity for oldassociate’sIntroduce PIPDaily monitoring of CsatEducation (Hire Graduates from withinthe company via IJP )Tenure ( give ownership to old tenureassociates)Conduct refresher trainingTeam leader (Provide leadershipcoaching)Create knowledge baseIntroduce r & r programsincorporate graduation in the hiringprocessshare best practiceIntroduce buddy programImpactLow HighControl impact matrix of the vital X’sImprove

33.
05/14/1333FMEA ImproveC SAT FMEA.xlsx

34.
05/14/1334Assessing performance post improve phaseControlWe can clearly see that post improvementthere are very less defects and theperformance is also consistent

35.
05/14/1335Assessing process capability post improve phaseControlopportunities 219defects 16DPMO 73059Sigma Level 2.95There is a substantial improvement in the sigma level of theprocess

36.
05/14/1336Confirming performance improvement via Hypothesis testingControlMann-Whitney Test and CI: CSAT Score, NewCSAT ScoreN MedianCSAT Score 219 69.046New CSAT Score 219 82.000Point estimate for ETA1-ETA2 is -14.23795.0 Percent CI for ETA1-ETA2 is (-16.457,-12.316)W = 33218.5Test of ETA1 = ETA2 vs ETA1 not = ETA2 issignificant at 0.0000Mann -whitney also suggests improvement in the c satscore.

37.
05/14/1337Control Plan Control

38.
05/14/1338THANK YOU