This is my academic project. Our company had two problems 1) Battery charging issue 2) Customer Service. We solved both these problems by using DMAIC and PDSA methodologies.

1. Project Name: Battery Charging issue (Team-7)
Project Members: Swapneel Shah, Avinash Raju, Venkatesh
Srinivasan, Japan Shah, Kalyan Sirivaram

2. Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

3. Project Problem and Goal Statement
Problem Statement: In the last 3 months,25 % of the customer base of LSS
systems, LLC have reported problems related to the battery of the cell phone, which
represents the 15% of the overall cost of the operating cash flow of the company. The
problems are listed below.
➢ Cell phone Battery Discharges too fast.
➢ Average Battery life is much lesser than anticipated.
➢ Too many requests for battery replacement.
➢ Functionality of the device is being affected by quick discharging of battery
➢ Device is heating up.
➢ Battery not getting charged.
Goal Statement:
Make all battery related compliance to the specific requirement defined by the company regarding
the charge hold-back period.

4. Project Champion or Sponsor: Swapneel Shah
Project Team Leader or Black Belt: Venkatesh Srinivasan
Project Team Members: Avinash Raju
Ad Hoc Members or SMEs: Kalyan Sirivaram
Roles and Team Membership

5. Project Plan
24-Sep 1-Oct 8-Oct 15-Oct 22-Oct 29-Oct 5-Nov 24-Nov
Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

6. Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

7. High level process map (SIPOC)
Final Inspection
Dismantling and
re installing
wiring
•Customer
With complaint
.
SUPPLIERSUPPLIER INPUTINPUT PROCESSPROCESS OUTPUTOUTPUT CUSTOMERCUSTOMER
CTQCRITICAL TO QUALITY
CTQCRITICAL TO QUALITY
•Complaint from
customer
• Feedback
•Technical experts
• CORRECTED
BATTERY
•
Performance
Matching
expectation
• Customer • Repaired product
Matches customer
profile
•
•
• initial Test
•
•Software update
•

8. PARETO CHART OF ISSUES

9. FMEA
Function
Potential Failure
mode Severity Potential effects of failure Potential causes of failure
Occurrenc
e Current Process Control
Battery not charging properly
charger not plugged
properly 6 Battery life Carelessness of user 34 NA
charger wire issue 2
battery and personal damage
possbile Poor quality of charger 33 Better wire selection
power adaptability issue 5 Power conversion factors Impact battery life 61 Manufacture adpators
improper sealing of
battery 7 Poor design/manufacturing Poor quality of phone manufacturing 47
quality manufacturing
process
Battery charge disspating faster
Battery not charged
properly 6 Battery life Carelessness of user 34 NA
battery not fully charged 4 Battery life Carelessness of user 46 NA
Impoper seating of battery 4 Poor design/manufacturing Poor quality of phone manufacturing 53
quality manufacturing
process
Internal wire problems 9 Poor battery life Improper manufacturing process 83 Quality check
hardware design problems 3
Poor design and qulaity of
phone Poor quality of phone manufacturing 55
quality product design
process
software occupying more
battery 9 Poor battery life
improper verification and validation of
software 81 Software testing process

10. Process Capability for current Situation

11. DATA COLLECTION
● Directly from the customers from feedback
● Data from Quality testing and control team who initially inspected faulty
products.
● Technical evaluation and R&D team.
● Product Development team
● Past products experience
● Software developers
● Online sources, forums, journals and also from reverse engineering of
competitors products.
● From the benchmarking process

12. DATA COLLECTION SOURCES
● For feedback call centre/customer service person will call the customer
and ask about whether product is working according to their requirements.
● From the online sources, we find surveys as well as get surveys related to
battery issues, also from the reviews of experts and consumers around the
globe, we get data.

13. Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

14. Cause and Effect of Battery
charge dissipating

15. Root cause Analysis

16. Value Stream Map of process Before and
After Improvement
Initial Inspection
+ve activity
Disassembling the
faulty product
-ve activity
Installation of the
new wire system
-ve activity
Software Update
+ve activity
Final Inspection and
dispatch
+ve activity
Initial Inspection
+ve activity
Disassembling and assembling the
product
+ve activity
Software Update
+ve activity
Final Inspection and
dispatch
+ve activity

17. Analysis
● Initial Overview of the process identifies 5 key processes which constitute
the overall activity from the receipt of the defective product to its delivery
after repair
● Disassembling the faulty product/removal of the faulty wiring and
assembling the product after installing the new wire system were two
separate processes which were not adding any value, hence were termed
“ – ve”
● These processes were combined together to reduce the overall time
frame, and the combined process was found to be adding value. Hence
was termed as a + ve activity

18. Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

19. OPTIMAL SOLUTION AND
IMPLEMENTATION
● Basically there are 2 main causes which were figured out form different
analysis.
● Internal wire problem and software is consuming more battery.
● Among these 2 software is having weightage of 40% and 60 % is for
internal wire problem. We will send an update of a software. For the
internal wire problem we will take back the from customers, we will do
recall or free part replacement service.

20. Process Capability After Implementation

21. PILOT TESTING
● Beta test- Customer walkthroughs and expert reviews, involving
stakeholders.
● After the problem is fixed, the newly produced phone are pilot tested .
● A random sample is taken from the manufacturing lot and beta testing for
full functionality is made.
● By this method, the compliance of the produced products can be found
before it reached the customer.

22. Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control

23. STANDARDIZATION
Benchmarking
● Understand Industry standards by studying similar products available in the market.
● Conducting Reverse Engineering of those particular products which have the highest
quality characteristics among its class
● Comparison of technology and processes of the Reverse engineered product to our own
product to identify potential areas that are to be improved
● Implementation of the corrected technology and processes

24. Control Chart For implementing
solution(Before)
service centre
Number
inspected
Number
Nonconfirming
proportion
nonconfirming
1 150 37 0.246666667
2 150 35 0.233333333
3 150 38 0.253333333
4 150 36 0.24
5 150 34 0.226666667
6 150 32 0.213333333
7 150 40 0.266666667
8 150 42 0.28
9 150 35 0.233333333
10 150 38 0.253333333
11 150 45 0.3
12 150 36 0.24
13 150 37 0.246666667
14 150 37 0.246666667
15 150 40 0.266666667
16 150 36 0.24
17 150 37 0.246666667
18 150 38 0.253333333
19 150 40 0.266666667
20 150 41 0.273333333
21 150 32 0.213333333
22 150 38 0.253333333

25. Control Chart For implementing
solution(After)
service centre
Number
inspected
Number
Nonconfirming
proportion
nonconfirming
1 150 0 0
2 150 0 0
3 150 0 0
4 150 0 0
5 150 1 0.006666667
6 150 0 0
7 150 0 0
8 150 0 0
9 150 0 0
10 150 2 0.013333333
11 150 0 0
12 150 2 0.013333333
13 150 0 0
14 150 0 0
15 150 0 0
16 150 0 0
17 150 0 0
18 150 0 0
19 150 0 0
20 150 0 0
21 150 1 0.006666667

28. Project Name: Service repair Problem (Team-7)
Project Members: Swapneel Shah, Avinash Raju, Venkatesh
Srinivasan, Japan Shah, Kalyan Sirivaram

30. Background
● 80% of the total problems which LSS systems faced were related to quick
discharging batteries.
● The resolution of these problems took an unusually long period of time
approximating 1 month.
● The service department of the company handles fixing of these issues.

31. Aim
● Our aim is to bring down the process time from a month to 10 days which
will take effect from this quarter.
● We aim to improve and standardize the processes in the service
department and identify and remove non value added activities.

32. Specific questions to address in
this cycle
● What are the value and non value added activities in the process?
● Which process is consuming most of the time?
● Identify the bottlenecks

33. Predictions/Hypotheses
● Ho= service time will remain to 30 days
● H1= Service time will be less than 30 days.

34. Plan for change/test/intervention
● Who (target population): Service process, equipment and operators,
quality & test engineers
● What (change/test): Service lead time, Quality of service
● When (dates of test): From upcoming Quarter
● Where (location): Service Center
● How (description of plan): Using Quality tools to analyze the process and
come up with optimal solution.

35. Measure
● We will measure time of each individual process in the servicing of the
defective phone. We aim to reduce unnecessary utilization of resources
using lean principles.

36. Plan for data collection
● Who (will collect): Quality team
● What (measures):Time Study
● When (time period): From the receipt to the delivery of the product
● Where (location):Service Center
● How (method): Time study analysis and Value stream Mapping

38. What We Plan to Do?
● As service repair consists of several processes and different
timelines, we see that value stream mapping would be a good tool
to analyze the process.

39. Customer
Service Center
Quality Control Supervisor
Quality Department
Phone Return
Main Service Plant
(Receiving)
10Days
I
10 Days
Inspecting the Faulty phone
C/T = 1 Day
Initial Inspection
Disassemble the Faulty part
C/T = 1 Day
Disassembly
Adding the needed hardware
and assembling the phone
C/T = 1 Day
Assembly
Software Upgradation for the
phone
C/T = 1 Day
Updation
Inspecting the Serviced phone
C/T = 2 Days
Final Inspection
I I I I
I
10 Days
Main Service Plant
(Shipping)
10Days
Service Center
Customer
Delivery
1 Day
10 Days
1 Day
1 Day
1 Day
1 Day
1 Day
1 Day
2 Day
1 Day 10 Days Total Lead Time =
24 Days
Value Added Time
= 6 Days
Current Value Stream Map

40. Inference from VSM
● From the previous slide we can infer the following.
● Customer centers sent phones to the service centers periodically every 10 days.
● For e.g. they used to send phones every 10 days periodically, but if the phone arrives on the 1st
or 2nd day then it has to wait till 10th day of the periodic cycle.
● Disassembly and assembly are carried as 2 different process.
● The lead time between these two processes is 4 days.

41. Proposed Value Stream Map
Customer
Service Center
Quality Control Supervisor
Quality Department
Phone Return
Main Service Plant
(Receiving)
DailySchedule
I
1 Day
Inspecting the Faulty phone
C/T = 1 Day
Initial Inspection
Fix the Faulty part with a new
part
C/T = 1 Day
Disassembly &
Assembly Software Upgradation for the
phone
C/T = 1 Day
Updation
Inspecting the Serviced phone
C/T = 2 Days
Final InspectionI I I
I
1 Day
Main Service Plant
(Shipping)
DailySchedule
Service Center
Customer
Delivery
1 Day
1 Day
1 Day
½ Day
1 Day
½ Day
1 Day
½ Day 1 Day Total Lead Time =
3½ Days
Value Added Time
= 4 Days

42. Value Stream Mapping Analysis
● From the proposed VSM we could see that,
● The transportation cycle is changed to 1 day, thereby reducing 18 days of idle time.
● Disassembly and assembly are combined into single work station thereby reducing 2 days and
labor.
● The total lead time and value added time got reduced from 24 days and 6 days to 3.5 days and
4 days respectively.
● It is clearly visible that the major chunk of the time is consumed by the idle waiting of the
product to be delivered to the service plant.
● The non-value adding processes were minimized and an ideal state map is developed and the
process time went down by 75% from around a month to nearly a week

44. Time Reduction Implementation
0
5
10
15
20
20
1 2 1 2 42 1 1 1 1 1.5
TIMETAKEN(DAYS)
PROCESS
Time Reduction on Implementing
PDSA
Before Implementing PDSA After Implementing PDSA

45. Summary
● From the VSM and bar chart analysis, transportation is found to be the
bottleneck
● By eliminating the bottleneck, the process time has reduced from a month
to a week.
● Work in Process Inventory was reduced form one day to half a day.

46. Hypothesis
● We could see that the process time has been reduced to one week from
30 days
● Hence we reject the null hypothesis, Ho=service time will remain to 30 days

48. Documenting the Data
● Non value adding activities were identified and measures were taken to
eliminate them.
● The objective to reduce the process time to a week was achieved.
● The process has been standardized and documented for the further
references.

49. Next Steps
● Continuously monitor the process for the deviations in the process.
● Implement individual control chart for process to achieve better
performance.
● Incentives can be provided to employees with high performance index to
motivate them.