The document describes an improvement project for a company's tender management process. The process was controlled by the Project Management Office (PMO) and had high quality standards but also room for improvement. The project team analyzed waste and delays, then improved the process by implementing a content management system, Scrum framework, training, and new roles. This reduced lead time and costs while maintaining quality standards. The improvements generated an estimated annual savings of 136,000 Euros.

1. Improvement of a Tender Management Process
Annalisa Caponerahttp://ie.linkedin.com/pub/annalisa-caponera/31/253/8ba/
Lean
Project
6σ

2. Statementbefore improvement (from the project Chart)
The tender management process is controlled by the project management office (PMO) and provide the 80% of company’s procurements
The process has high standard of quality: 0 defects, 90% of placement in the first 4 positions and 40% of success
INTRO
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Tenders distribution
Number of tenders
Team Capacity

3. Problem Statement (from the project Chart)
Company: IT and Services
Sponsor of the Project is the top management
Customer: PMO (Project Management Office)
Project Manager: PMO manager
Project Leader: Annalisa Caponera
Other Stakeholders: Final Clients, Tenders team, HR, Delivery Managers, QMS Team
Duration2 years
Budget 40.000 €per year
Approved by Technical Direction
DEFINE

4. Problem Statement: VoC
Business Case: Cost cutting
1.Reduce use of Delivery Managers (500€/d)
Time= 4day/tender *68 tender=272 day
Cost= 272 day *500 €/day= 136.000 €
2.Reduce Overtime of the PMO team (350€/day)
Time= 10 day/month *12 month= 120 day
Cost=350 €/d * 120 day=42.000 €
3.Invest part of the saving to enforce the team (SW, HW, Resources)
4.Keep the same results in terms of placement
VoC
PMO wants
to reduce the involvement of Delivery Managers in Tender Management at 2 day per tender
Increase process speed
Add resources to the tender team
PMO doesn’t want:
the cost of the improvement exceeds the budget.
the quality of the business proposal decreases in term of:
Image (good placements)
Procurements
DEFINE

5. CTQSMART GOALS
Decrease DM Work-time
Goal 1: -50% in 2 years
-25% effort first year (4 to 3d)
-33% effort second (3 to 2d)
Reduce Overtime PMO:
Goal 2: -50% in 2 years
-25% effort first year (120 to 90 day per year)
-33% effort second (90 to 60 day/year)
Increase Process speed
Goal 3: reduce the Lead Time:
-15% Lead time first year
-15% lead timethe second year
Goal 1
Goal 2
Goal 3
Goal 4
Specific
Measurable
Assignable
Realistic
Time-related
DEFINE
Keep Quality Standard
Goal 4: expected results
≥90% of placements in the first 4 positions General
≥90% of placements in the first 4 positions Technical
≥40% of success (procurements)

6. SIPOC
Supplier
Input
Process
Output
Customer
Customer
Tender requirements
Tender publication
Top management
Margin and availability
Decision and margin
PMO Team
TenderScheme
Writing contribution
Strategy, Tender scheme, Request for contribution
Writing
Control
business proposal
(technical financial)
Respect of rules
PM
Informationwriter contribution
Writing
business proposal
(technical)
Respect of delivery deadline
HWSW suppliers
quotation
Writing
business proposal
Evaluation: technical score+ financial score
Writers
Contribution
Schemes pictures
Writing
business proposal
Bidmanager
Administrative and financial contributions
Writing
closure
business proposal
DEFINE
S
I
O
P
C

7. VSM (present)
MEASURE
Customer
Approval
Brainstorming
RFI
Draft
Editing
parts
Merge
Control
Closure
Delivery
IN
IN
IN
DM
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
4
P/T 4h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
6
P/T 2days
W/T ---
FTQ 50%
2
P/T 1d
W/T ----
FTQ 100%
1
P/T3d
W/T 1d
FTQ 80%
2
P/T 1d
W/T 1d
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4 h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
1
68
3 days
3 days
3 days
Total P/T: 8 d
Total W/T: 2w and 1d
Total FTQ: 0.4
Lead time: 3w and 4d
2h
3days
3 days
3 days
4h
2d
1d
3d
1d
4h
4h
2h
1 d
1 d
1
1
PMO Team
DM
1
Requests for missed info
HW SW suppliers
Contributions
1/2

8. Customer
Approval
Brainstorming
RFI
Draft
Editing
parts
Merge
Control
Closure
Delivery
IN
IN
IN
DM
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
4
P/T 4h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
6
P/T 2days
W/T ---
FTQ 50%
2
P/T 1d
W/T ----
FTQ 100%
1
P/T3d
W/T 1d
FTQ 80%
2
P/T 1d
W/T 1d
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4 h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
1
68
3 days
3 days
3 days
W= Waiting
P=Over-processing
D=Defect
T=Transportation
M=Motion
I=Inventory
O=Overproduction
U= Non-utilizedtalent
2h
3days
3 days
3 days
4h
2d
1d
3d
1d
4h
4h
2h
1 d
1 d
1
1
PMO Team
DM
1
Requests for missed info
HW SW suppliers
Contributions
1/2
MEASURE
VSM: Waste

9. Brainstorming
RFI require a lot of time: answer time is too high
Information about internal skills and experience are difficult to collect (personal records)
People don’t like share information about their projects
Past procurements Information are on paper
DM are busy and don’t respects deadlines
Contribution from DM are often fragmentary and incomplete
DM writes too slow
Works from different tenders could be mixed
Long time to correct defects (overwriting, more realise)
ANALYSE

10. Fishbone diagram: delays
Delay in the process
Materials
Method
Manpower
Management
Machine
Measure
Workload too high
Lack of skills
No control
Lack of a monitoring system
Information are not shared
Organization chart
static approach: Waterfall
Absence of a digital repository for all documentation
No activity tracking system
No KPI
Documents in hard copy
Network issues
No template for documents
Motivation (DM)
To many picture to realise
People involved in more than on activity per time
ANALYSE

11. Improve Phase: Output
Infrastructure
Content Management System (all in 1)
Tool Scrum to define, measure analyse and control (Visual monitoring)
Method
Agile approach: SCRUM
Standard template for contribution:
Poke Yoke
skills
Training about:
the process
New tools
Lean Six Sigma
New people in the team with cross functional skills:
Technical Writer
Graphic Designer
IMPROVE

12. Customer
Approval
Planning Tasks
RFI
Editing
Task
Merge
Control
Closure
Delivery
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
4
P/T 1d
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
6
P/T 1d
W/T ---
FTQ 90%
2
P/T2d
W/T ---
FTQ 80%
5
P/T 1d
W/T 1d
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4 h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 4h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
2
P/T 2h
W/T ---
FTQ 100%
1
68
Total P/T: 6 d 4 h
Total W/T: 3 d
Total FTQ: 0.72
Lead time: 9d 4h
Quote
1 day
1day
1
HW SW suppliers
1
1
PMO Team
DM
IN
2h
2h
1d
1d
2d
1d
4h
4h
1 d
1 d
1d
Quick Checks
Content management fulfilment
SCRUMWISE (project management Tool)
Content Management System
Feedbacks results
VSM: future
IMPROVE

13. Framework: SCRUM
MEASURE
IMPROVE

14. Content Management System
MEASURE
IMPROVE
CMS manual fulfilment process (Data entry)
Criteria:
Number of tender to process
Revenue per tender
Number
Revenue
Teleco
Energy
P. Admin.
Others
Number of tender per client
Teleco
Energy
P. Admin.
Others
CMS Automatic Fulfilment
Criteria:
Occurrence of argument for typology (Pareto Charts)
Automatic fulfilment during the data process
1.Open Source
2.Simple to use
3.Safe
4.Powerful Search en.

15. Kanban vs SCRUM
A Kanban Board helps to manage the WIP of a value stream or process.
A Scrum Board helps to manage the WIP associated with a complex project.
A Kanban Board is usually better suited to manage the WIP of individuals
a Scrum Board is better suited to manage the WIP of cross- functional teams.
IMPROVE
MEASURE
IMPROVE
A Kanban Board and a Scrum Board are similar.
Both are used to help manage WIP.
However the type of WIP that is managed by each is different.

16. Control
Inventory
Change management
Capacity/ Respect of deadline
(Burn-down charts)
Daily scrum
Issues resolution
Visual control (Scrumwise Board)
Error control
Process audit every 2-4 week: Retrospective meetings
Standard template for contribution:
Poke Yoke
CONTROL

17. SCRUMWISE Story Board & BURNDOWN Charts
IMPROVE
CONTROL

18. Effect of the process Improvement in €
Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control
Total P/T: 8 d
Total W/T: 2w and 1d
Total FTQ: 0.4
Lead time: 3w and 4d
Total P/T: 6 d 4 h 1.5days less
Total W/T: 3 d 1W 3d less
Total FTQ: 0.72 +0.32
Lead time: 1W4d 4h ~ퟐ퐖퐥퐞퐬퐬
Use of delivery Managers
2 day/Tender cost 68.000 €
Overtime PMO Team
0days/month cost 0 €
Use of delivery Managers
4 day/Tender cost 136.000 €
Overtime PMO Team
10days/month cost 42.000 €
Reduction of process steps
2 part-time resource employed
New Content Management system for RFI
New Agile Method
New Agile tool for continuous Improvement
Reduction of process time
Cost of the implementation:
8.000 €CMS
1.000€HW+ installation
7.000€Data entry cost
Cost of SCRUM Tool: 2.500€/y
New Resource:
•1 designer (part-time) 12.000€/y
•1 technical writer (part-time) 10.000 €/y
TOTAL: 30.500€
CONCLUSION

19. Effect of the process Improvement in QA
Define
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control
RESULTS:
All quality goals achieved
Increase of good placements for technical proposals (+8%)
Improvements for the future:
introduce a set of KPI to monitor the number of partnerships derived from tender placements
Quality Standard Before:
0 defects,
90% of placements in the first 4 positions general
90% of placements in the first 4 positions for the technical proposal
40% of success
Quality Standard After:
defects: 0
% 1st–4thplace general: 90%
% 1st–4thplace technical: 98%
% of success: 40%
GOAL 4: Keep the same standard of quality
Evaluation method: clients graded list (general and for the technical proposal)
CONCLUSION

20. “The journeyof athousand miles beginswith one step”
Thanks for your attention!
Lao Tzu -604 BC