Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a service process

TIT L Ser v MA S Ma n AU T DIR E DA T L E: Prop o v ice Proce s S TER DE G n agement T HOR: Jo s E CTORS: T E: March M A o sal of a s s. G REE: M a s é Ramón Jordi Oliv e 17th, 201 4 A ST E Lean Six a ster in S c Barillas e lla Nadal 4 E R T Sigma m c ience in T and Gem a T HE S m ethodolo g T elecomm u a Calleja S S IS g y imple m u nication E anz m entation E ngineerin i n a g & Títol: Proposta d'una implementació de la metodologia Lean Six Sigma en procés de serveis. Autor: José Ramón Barillas Directors: Jordi Olivella Nadal i Gema Calleja Sanz Data: 17 maig 2014 Resum L'objectiu principal d'aquest estudi és proposar millores per als processos en un Departament de Serveis, utilitzant la perspectiva del Lean Six Sigma, el que podria reduir significativament el temps de resolució d'incidències i augmentar el nivell de satisfacció del client, aconseguint importants millores en el rendiment d'aquesta empresa. Els objectius generals son, per tant, validar que es pot aconseguir l'aplicabilitat de Lean Six Sigma en aquest Departament de Servei i dur a terme una revisió en profunditat dels processos de Gestió d'Incidències que es podrien millorar. Aquest projecte es basa en les dades empíriques obtingudes com a part de la ERP per aquesta empresa en diversos fabricants de cartró. L'anàlisi de dades es basa també en l'observació i les entrevistes semi-estructurades amb els empleats que treballen en aquest Departament. L'objectiu és aconseguir millores utilitzant com a referència les implementacions anteriors dels eines i tècniques teòrics de Lean Six Sigma en altres Departaments de Servei. Paraules clau: Metodologia Lean Six Sigma, Departament de Serveis, Gestió d'Incidències Title: Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process. Author: José Ramón Barillas Directors: Jordi Olivella Nadal and Gema Calleja Sanz Date: March 17th, 2014 Overview The main goal of this study is to propose improvements for processes in a Service Department of an ERP company, using the perspective of the Lean Six Sigma, which could reduce significantly the time in solving incidences and increase the level of customer’s satisfaction, achieving important improvements in the performance of this company. The general objectives are, therefore, to validate that is achievable the applicability of Lean Six Sigma in this Department and to perform a depth review in the Incident Management processes that could be improved. This project is based on empirical data obtained as a part of the ERP implemented by this company in several cardboard manufacturers. The data analysis also will be based on observation and semi-structured interviews with employees working in such department. The aim is to achieve improvements using as reference previous implementations of the theoretical Lean Six Sigma tools and techniques in other Service Departments. Keywords: Lean Six Sigma methodology, Service Department, Incident Management Dedication I lovingly dedicate this thesis to my fiancée Rosa, who has been my love and support in each step of the way. This thesis is dedicated to my parents, Ramón & Graciela, who have supported me all the way since the beginning of my studies. -The real world is the loving thoughts on our mind– INDEX INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................... 3 1.1.The Lean concept. ............................................................................................................. 3 1.1.1The Five Lean Principles ........................................................................................ 3 1.1.2Lean in Service Sector ........................................................................................... 4 1.1.3Challenges in Lean implementation ....................................................................... 6 1.2.Six Sigma. ........................................................................................................................... 7 1.2.1Six Sigma as a Metric. Principles and Implementation .......................................... 9 1.2.2Leverage on Six Sigma using Lean. ..................................................................... 10 1.2.3Six Sigma as Methodology ................................................................................... 12 1.2.4The DMAIC Model ................................................................................................ 12 1.2.5Six Sigma as a Management System .................................................................. 14 1.2.6Techniques and tools in Six Sigma ...................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2. DEFINING SERVICE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES ............... 16 CHAPTER 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT .................. 19 3.1Company Background .................................................................................................... 19 3.1.1Service Department .............................................................................................. 19 3.2Case Study: Present Stages ........................................................................................... 20 3.2.1Admissions ........................................................................................................... 21 3.2.2Review and Testing .............................................................................................. 22 3.2.3Repair ................................................................................................................... 23 3.2.4Closure ................................................................................................................. 24 CHAPTER 4. PROCESS ANALYSIS ............................................................. 27 4.1Procedure followed in the Service Department ............................................................ 27 4.2Data Collection Method ................................................................................................... 28 4.2.1Non-probabilistic sampling ................................................................................... 28 4.2.2Distribution of questionnaires and individual interviews. ...................................... 28 4.2.3The interview guide .............................................................................................. 29 4.2.4The Questionnaire ................................................................................................ 30 4.3Defining Performance Indicators ................................................................................... 30 4.4Data measured ................................................................................................................. 31 4.4.1Availability ............................................................................................................. 31 4.4.2Mean Time to Restore Service ............................................................................. 31 4.4.3Customer’s complaints classification .................................................................... 32 CHAPTER 5. ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITIES ............................................ 33 5.1Analysis of data from interviews and questionnaires ................................................. 33 5.1.1Standards in procedures ...................................................................................... 33 5.1.2Causes and effects ............................................................................................... 34 5.1.3Auto-evaluation results ......................................................................................... 35 5.2Actual VSM diagram of Incident Management process in Service Department of Rboard. ....................................................................................................................................... 37 CHAPTER 6. INCIDENCE MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENTS ..................... 38 6.1Short-term improvements: New Stages ........................................................................ 38 6.1.1Improvement 1: Incident report............................................................................. 38 6.1.2Improvement 2: Registration ................................................................................ 39 6.1.3Improvement 3: Processing .................................................................................. 40 6.1.4Improvement 4: Resolution of Incident ................................................................. 42 6.1.5Improvement 5: Closure of the Incident ............................................................... 45 6.2Long-term improvements ............................................................................................... 45 6.3Improved VSM diagram of Incident Management process in Rboard’s Service Department. ................................................................................................................................ 47 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................... 48 BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................. 50 TABLE INDEX ................................................................................................. 53 FIGURE INDEX ................................................................................................ 54 ANNEXES ........................................................................................................ 55 Introduction 1 INTRODUCTION After understanding Lean and Six Sigma tools and techniques, this project will analyze the implementation of both methods in the service sector through literature review, and analyzing the empirical data in a Service Department of an important company in cardboard sector, called Rboard; it will determine the process improvements that can be made through Lean Six Sigma and improve the time and quality of the response to their customers. Despite the fact of the increase in productivity of employees, the Service Department of Rboard’s Company is not offering quality services to customers. The objective of this study is exploring the process of implementation of Lean throughout all the levels of Service of the organization, analyzing to which organizational factors can enhance or impede this process. The thorough review of the literature aims to bring out the challenges that companies are facing in the process of implementing Lean Six Sigma approach as well as some to determine limitations and barriers of the model. The main goal of this study is to propose improvements for processes in a Service Department of this ERP Company, using the perspective of the Lean Six Sigma, which could reduce significantly the time in solving incidences and increase the level of customer’s satisfaction, achieving important improvements in the performance of this company. For these reasons, this project aims to explore and understand Lean implementation in the company and the objectives intended are:  To understand Lean techniques, applicable for Service Department.  To identify Customer Services Functions and understand how Lean Six Sigma (LSS) concepts can be applied to improve processes.  To identify the challenges that personal could face during LSS implementation and to identify the advantages of its application.  After understanding LSS tools and methodology as well as companies services procedures about the management of information of technical incidences and requests, the personal will have empirical collected data to understand the process improvements that can be made through Lean Six Sigma. The general objectives are, therefore, to validate that is achievable the applicability of Lean Six Sigma in this Department and to perform a depth review in the Incident Management processes that could be improved. This project is based on empirical data obtained as a part of the ERP implemented by this company in several cardboard manufacturers.Hence, does not cover other departments within the complete organization or other similar companies. However, secondary data of several other Service Departments will be used as comparison to analyze the applicability of LSS. Therefore, it is not possible to generalize the results obtained from each particular case. The data analysis will be based on observation and semi-structured interviews with employees working in such Department. The aim is to suggest improvements 2 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process using as reference previous implementations of the theoretical Lean Six Sigma tools and techniques in other Service Departments. This work is organized in 6 chapters. After the present introduction, Chapter 1 presents the prior and essential details that need to know about Lean Six Sigma theoretical concepts. There is a systematic literature review in order to be familiar with the topic based on different point of views of the main contributors for Lean theories. It presents the background and the importance of use Lean in service sector for each case. It also introduces the methodology, tools available and used, and studies of early implementations. Chapter 2 is an identification of the measurable objectives of the improvements. Chapter 3 reviews the description of the company under study. Chapter 4 shows define and measure of the current state of the art in the process. In these chapters, both theoretical and practical methodologies have been applied. Chapter 5 gives the analysis to the opportunities found to improve the process. Chapter 6 provides improvements in services processes designed for such company and steps recommended for future closure. Finally, the conclusions and limitations are at the end. Literature Review 3 CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW Analyzing major objectives stated in Introduction, it is clear that there is a considerable amount of literature available regarding the use of Lean thinking and Six Sigma within the manufacturing sector, but relatively little regarding their use in the Service sector. The purpose of this literature review is to examine, research papers, Web sites, journal articles, books and industry publications to provide an overview of Lean thinking and Six Sigma, identifying the major challenges that have faced authorities of Service Departments implementing these practices and examine their use in similar organizations. 1.1. The Lean concept. Despite the term Lean, was coined by James Womack, Lean thinking originated within the Japanese automobile industry following World War II and is principally based on the Toyota Production System (TPS), which was developed by a production executive named Taiichi Ohno and was used to improve the quality and productivity within the Toyota Motor Company [2]. Lean later increased in popularity in the 1990s, after the publication of the bestselling book, The Machine that Changed the World: The Story of Lean Production (Womack, Jones, and Roos 1991), which chronicled how organizations could transform their operations by adopting the lean approach developed at Toyota. Lean has since been widely adopted across every manufacturing industry ranging from automobiles to electronics, and it is being increasingly applied to a wide range of governmental entities and lately private-sector service organizations. Lean has evolved as a management approach to improve all processes across the industry [4]. Manufacturing companies started to implement Lean by adapting similar practices in Service Departments within the organization because of positive results from Lean practices. In the study made by Bowen and Youngdahl (1998), it was shown that service sector could truly benefit from the adaptation of the theories developed for manufacturing sector. Also in [9] supported this argument by pointing out that in service sector, people valued faster service and Lean helped to eliminate waste from the value chain helping customer to receive the service immediately. 1.1.1 The Five Lean Principles Organizations should focus on continuous improvement by using the five Lean principles to improve their operations [6]. These principles are described by Womack and Jones [10], such as specifying the value, the value stream, flow, pull and perfection, which are discussed in the following: 1. The first one is specifying the value from point of view of customer. 1 Sin c sen s Hav i imp o Sig m sup p sub s exp r impl e acti o ther e iden Wit h the sho r cust o req u the S dat e the C 1.2. 2 A cc o cust o pro c and pro d 0 c e Six Sig m s e that it w i ng identif i o rtant to t m a jargon. p lier pers p s tantially f r essed by ementatio n o nable it e e fore is t o tified in Q F h a specifi c appropria t r t docume n omers ar e u iring impr o S ix Sigma e s for com p C TQ metri c 2 Le v o rding to [ 6 omer’s cri t c ess offer t lead time . d uction me Fig. 1.4 m a is all a w ould beg i ed who t h t he custo m This is a p ectives o f rom cus t the custo m n . In su c e ms suita b o implem e F D one at c work pro c t e time to n t, a pag e e having o vement, team who p letion. H e c s to be s t v erage on 6 ], the pri n t ical-to-qu a t he great e . The Tab l thodologi e Proposal of a . Quality m a bout enh a i n with an h e custom m er, calle d a critical s t o n what i t omers’ o w m er are s o c h case, b le for S e nt Six S a time. c ess sele c prepare t h e or less, giving ri s states pr o will work o e nce, the P udied. Six Sig m n ciple of L e a lity issue s st opport u l e 1.1 sho w e s Six Sig m a Lean Six Sig m m easured a ncing cu s exercise ers are, t h d custom e t ep to su c i s import a wn pers p o metimes the fuzz y S ix Sigma igma on c ted for Si x he Projec t that outli n s e to dis s o ject goal, o n the pro j P roject Ch m a using e an Six Si g s and cre a u nity for i m ws the fu n m a and Le a m a methodolog y in Six Sig m s tomer sa t to identify h e next s t e r critical - c cess with a nt to cu s p ectives. F fuzzy, no t y CTQs m implem e the outco x Sigma i m t Charte r . n es what p s atisfactio n identifies j ect, and p arter will b Lean. g ma is th a a te the lo n m proveme n n damental a n. y implementatio m a terms t isfaction, i who the c ep is to fi to-quality Six Sigm s tomers c F urthermo r t amenabl e m ust be t e ntation.. T m es of w m plementa t The proj e p roblem o r n . It lists the proje c p rovides th e b e the obj e t activities n gest tim e n t in cost, q differenc e o n in a Service P it should m c ustomer s nd out w h (CTQ), i n a becaus e c an often re, the C e to Six S t ranslated The app r w ork proc e t ion, is it i s e ct charte r r problem s the outc o c t sponso r e start an d e ctive to d s that caus e delays i n quality, c a e s betwee n P rocess m ake s are. h at is n Six e the vary C TQs igma into r oach e sses s now r is a s the o mes r and d end efine e the n any a pital, n the Literature Review 11 Table 1.1. Main differences between Six Sigma and Lean methodologies Issues/problems/objectives Six Sigma Lean Attacks waste due to waiting, over-production, motion, over-processing, etc. no yes Focuses on customer value stream no yes Focuses on creating a visual workplace no yes Attacks work-in-process inventory no yes Focuses on good house keeping no yes Creates standard work sheets no yes Process control planning and monitoring yes no Employs a structured, rigorous and well planned problem solving methodology yes no Focuses on reducing variation and achieve uniform process outputs yes no Focuses heavily on the application of statistical tools and techniques yes no Six Sigma does not directly address process speed and so the lack of improvement in lead-time in companies applying Six Sigma methods alone is understandable [6]. In a similar manner, those companies engaged in Lean methodology alone show limited improvements across the organization due to the absence of Six Sigma cultural infrastructure. According to Martin [3], Six Sigma projects take months to finish, and they produce elite black belts who are disconnected from the shop floor, while, lean boost productivity but does not provide any tool to fix unseen quality issue. According to [6], lean brings action and intuition to the table, quickly attacking low hanging fruit with kaizen events, while Six Sigma uses statistical tools to uncover root causes and provide metrics as mile markers. According to [23], a pure Six Sigma approach lacks three desirable Lean characteristics: 1. No direct focus on improving the speed of a process. 2. No direct attention to reductions in the amount of inventory investment. 3. No quick financial gains due to the time required to learn and apply its methods and tools for data collection and analysis. For the same author [7], the shortcomings of a pure Lean improvement effort are: 1. Processes are not brought under statistical control. 2. There is no focus on evaluating variations in measurement systems used for decisions. 3. No process improvement practices link quality and advanced mathematical tools to diagnose process problems that remain once the obvious waste has been removed. When run separately, such programs will naturally collide with each other [24]. In contrast, a combination of Lean and Six Sigma has a positive impact on employee morale, inspiring change in the workplace culture because teams see the results of their efforts put to work almost immediately. According to George 12 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process [6], Lean Six Sigma directly attacks the manufacturing overhead and quality costs more effectively than any previous improvement methodology because it comprehends both quality and speed. Thus an obvious solution is to develop an integrated approach that will produce greater solutions in search of business and operational excellence, hence Lean Six Sigma. 1.2.3 Six Sigma as Methodology Six Sigma approach is not just counting defects in a process or product, but it is a methodology to improve processes. Summing up so far, the Six Sigma methodology focuses on [3]:  Managing the customer requirements.  Aligning the processes to achieve those requirements.  Analyzing the data to minimize the variations in those processes.  Rapid and sustainable improvement to those processes. When it looks at Six Sigma as a methodology, there are many models available for process improvement like DMADV, DMAIC, Breakthrough strategy, Roadmap, New Six Sigma, Eckes method, Six Sigma Roadmap, IDOV, and DMEDI [25]. The most widely used models are DMAIC and DMADV. The DMAIC model is used when a process or product is in existence but is not meeting the customer requirements. And the DMADV model is used when a process or product is not in existence or is needed to be developed [25] (Additional information for DMADV in Annex 6). 1.2.4 The DMAIC Model Motorola recognized [6] that there was a pattern to improvement (and use of data and process tools) that could naturally be divided into the five phases of problem solving, usually referred by the acronym DMAIC, which stands for Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control. DMAIC forms the five major phases of any Six Sigma project. This methodology centers on achieving the Critical To Quality (CTQ) characteristic, because it is used when the process does is in existence but is not meeting the customer requirements. In this case, are shown the phases of DMAIC model, applied to the incident management of the Rboard Company, as follows [6, 26, 24]: Phase One: Define Step1 is to formulate the Problem Statement articulating what is giving rise to customer dissatisfaction (e.g., 30% of incidences are no solved in a week). Step 2, it defines the outcome of this work process (e.g., Solving Time, Minutes from Target). Step 3, it states the project goal (e.g., Reduce solving time in 30%). The desired improvement is speculative at this point since it does not know the extent of natural variability present in the process. Nonetheless, the benefits of Literature Review 13 defect reduction will be likely being substantial. An estimate of the financial benefits if the targeted benefits are realized should be included. Phase Two: Measure Step 4 it draws a Process Map showing all the steps in the process including the linkages between steps. The process map will include all the steps, from taking the incidence to its solution. The Karma concept states the outcome of this process, Solving Time, is impacted by causes. It does not tell us what the causes are. We wish to determine what the causes are with Six Sigma so it may work on them to improve the outcome performance. Customer dissatisfaction has emerged as an issue because there is excessive variability in this outcome, that is, the average is not where it should be or could be and the standard deviation is too large. Some of the observed variability in the outcome will be due to common causes which it cannot do anything about within the scope of the problem being scrutinized, but a lot of the variability may be due to causes that it can do something about (assignable causes). Every one of the steps on the Process Map is a potential special cause, i.e., a possible contributor to the variability in the outcome and therefore defects. In a future step, it shall determine which of these potential causes are in fact responsible for introducing variability in the outcome. Step 5 is to Validate Measurement Systems. The central idea here is that the variability in the outcome must come from causes (any one or more of the steps on the process map) and not from errors in the measurement systems. Take as an example, a Voting Process involving voters coming into a polling booth for voting in an election. Here, voters fill out ballot papers, which are processed by a vote-counting machine, and the interpreted results are generated. Clearly, we would want the variability in the outcome (Interpreted Results) to come from causes (Voter Intent) and not from errors in measurement systems (confusing ballot paper design, error-prone vote counting machines). In fact, such errors must be a very small fraction of the margin of victory between the top two candidates or else the election results would be suspect. It is extremely important to validate measurement systems before proceeding to the next step in the Six Sigma implementation strategy. Step 6 is to Collect Data on the Outcome(s) [response variable(s)] for the purpose of determining the starting defect levels. Step 7 is to scrutinize the data collected and establish the Current Defect Levels. It is important to establish the baseline (current performance) so improvement from Six Sigma can be properly catalogued. Phase Three: Analyze Step 8 Properly Designed Procedures are employed to collect data on the potential causes and the response variable(s). As previously stated, every one of the steps on the process map is a potential cause. Actual VSM diagram of Incident Management process in the Service Department is used as tool. 14 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process Step 9 involves analyzing the data collected for identifying the Causes (called major impact factors or vital few causes) that are responsible for introducing variability in the outcome. The cause-effect diagram can be used for prioritization of potential improvements. Phase Four: Improve Step 10 the Major Impact Factors are determined as either set at the appropriate optimal values or are eliminated. When this is done, the average of the response variable moves in a favorable direction and the standard deviation decreases and all the benefits of Six Sigma accrue. The valuable sources are customer complaints, competitor analysis, employee suggestions, etc. In general, only poor performance processes or characteristics need improvement. Otherwise, the whole product shall be improved. Future VSM diagram is used as tool in the improvement of Incident Management process. Phase Five: Control Step 11 It is related to provide the maintenance of the improved process so that the improved Six Sigma process can run for a long time. There are also two activities in control phase. After improvement phase has been carried out, the planned improvements shall be verified. Improper or incorrect improvements will be discovered and corrected in the next improvement project. Track Chart is highly recommended to verify the long-term effects of improvements. Another important activity in this phase is to formalize the results. The results which only match a single process or product will be reorganized and reanalyzed to match the whole company. Both successful and failed cases shall be formalized, reported and stored. The companies should gain experience from those cases for further improvements. Based on that, a guideline shall be established. And that will be very helpful for the future Six Sigma projects. Every company shall create their own Six Sigma project guideline [14, 23, 27] 1.2.5 Six Sigma as a Management System Through experience, Motorola has found that using Six Sigma as a metric and as a methodology are not enough to drive the breakthrough improvements in an organization. Motorola ensures that Six Sigma metrics and methodology are adopted to improve opportunities which are directly linked to the business strategy. Now Six Sigma is also applied as a management system for executing the business strategy. Six Sigma approach provides a top-down solution to help the organization. It put the improvement efforts according to the strategy. It prepares the teams to work on the highly important projects. It drives clarity around the business strategy [31]. For such reasons, the approach of Six Sigma as Methodology is an extension to the Control phase, as a commitment of Management team to its long term application. Literature Review 15 1.2.6 Techniques and tools in Six Sigma Since the Six Sigma approach is invented, many old quality tools are adopted in Six Sigma process improvement project. At the same time, some new specific tools and techniques are introduced. There is no a specific tool or technique for one specific phase in Six Sigma. Any tool that is helpful for the process improvement can be applied in Six Sigma project. There are tools most widely used in all kinds of quality improvement. They are Cause-effect Diagram, Pareto Chart, Flow Chart, Histogram, Check Sheet, Control Chart, and Scatter Plot. The other special tools are gathered from successful Six Sigma cases which include Brainstorming, Affinity Diagramming, SIPOC Diagram, MSA, VOC Method and so on. Tools are tools. Using the proper one in the right place is the key factor which influences success. How to control such great power demands the understanding and familiarity of tools and techniques. That is why is needed the help from specialists. The functionality of these tools is described in Annex 7. After all, Six Sigma’s definition has reached three levels: as a metric, as a methodology, and as a management system. As a metric, it aims to reducing defects. The highest level “6σ” equates to 3.4 defects per million opportunities. Then, as a methodology, it is used and focused on improving process. In this case, DMAIC and DMADV models are the most common used. After that, as a management system, it can be performed, combining the metric and methodologies for executing the business strategy, and aims to continuous improving services quality, for a long period of time. This last phase will depend exclusively on Management’s implementation in the Company. 16 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process CHAPTER 2. DEFINING SERVICE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES So far has been conducted a literature review about Lean Six Sigma, in order to be able to identify critical success factors for incident management in Service Departments. Moreover, for this company has been undertaken a review into the characteristics displayed by the Incident Management and its approaches is used to observe the problems while working to restore service when unplanned outages occur and then identify the opportunities to be solved. Once the all picture of the activities is obtained from the Service Department environment, the Project Charter is defined in this chapter. Then, the idea is to quantify how much of the process will be improved, using measurable objectives. To do this, are established the problem statement and problem objectives:  Problem statement: Management of 620 incidents (mean), in 22 labor days at month. Incidences are piled up in no labor days in customers’ offices. Rboard works 8 hours daily, individual overtime if it is necessary. About 25% of incidences unsolved in 24 hours or less.  Problem objective: Management of 620 incidents (mean), in 30 labor days at month. Incidences are stored in no labor days in Rboard’s automatized Customer Service System. Remains Rboard working 8 hours daily but individual overtime rarely necessary. Reduction to 0% of unsolved incidences in 24 hours. Once determined the current state of the Service Management, then two characteristics Critical to Quality (CTQ) has been defined to measure the service quality:  The Loss Incidence metric is to count the total number of incidences that were lost, that means, completely unattended or attended only after 24 hours.  The Customer Complaint metric is to count the total number of complaints from customer. Table 2.1. Service Management metrics for Incidence Management quality Process Metrics Description Data to measure Loss incidence Measure how many incidences are lost among all the others Potential customer info, incidence type, loss or not, time of waiting. Customer complaints Measure the number of complaints received among all the possible complaints Customer info, complaints problem, solved or not, time of waiting Defining Service Management Objectives 17 With the CTQ characteristics, the next steps centre on achieving these CTQ’s, furthermore it helps to decide which process should be improved. To take a clear view of the scopes, objectives and team involved, is presented the Project Charter. Table 2.2. Project Charter Project Name Improving Customer Service System (CSS) Project number: Sponsoring Organization Rboard – Service Department Project Sponsor Name: Office: Phone: Email: Project Leader Name: Office: Phone: Email: Project complexity: High Resources: Attached in appendix Project Start: October 2013 Project End: January 2014 Teams Name: A., Juan Email: Title/Role: CEO Spain Name: B., María Email: Title/Role: Programmer Name: C., Juan Email: Title/Role: Programmer Name: D., María Email: Title/Role: Programmer Name: E., Juan Email: Title/Role: IT Engineer Name: F., María Email: Title/Role: IT Engineer Methodology: DMAIC Process type: Customer Service Milestone Define: Start 10/2013 End 11/ 2013 Measure: Start 11/2013 End 12/2013 Analyze: Start 12/2013 End 15 01 2014 Improve: Start 15 01 2014 End 31 01 2014 Control Start N/A Start N/A Problem Mission Statement: To increase customer satisfaction to the Help Desk. The company decides to reduce rate of unsolved incidences and customer complaints. Problem Statement: Nowadays, the customer complaints and incidences unsolved are increasing. Help desk complains that there is no standard procedure to manage incidences. The quality of service is declining. Project Objective: – To reduce the Solving Time in 30%, attending successfully incidences, taking into account more incidences in near future. – Reduce Customer complaints from 15% to 0%. As a final result, this Project Charter defines the characteristics to be improved. To take into account the measurable objectives in this project, in first place are necessary to gather preliminary information about incident managers, technical and managerial professionals with whom they work. Second, it is necessary to 18 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process design, develop, and validate interviews and questionnaires to measure characteristics displayed and approaches used by incident managers to solve problems when unplanned outages occur. Tools used are: VSM, Lean VSM, Cause effect charts, Cheek sheet, Brainstorming and Voice of the Customer (VOC). In cases like this, service improvement projects have to deal with customers. It must be pointed out that to capture the Voice of the Customer (VOC) is a difficult task to be accomplished. It would rather to use the direct contact methods like interviews at the point of provision, instead of the less direct method of collecting feedback comments on the daily breakdowns submitted by the managers. To compensate for this limited amount of information, it has been based on the weekly technical meetings and workers observations directly on the Help Desk in order to identify the measurable objectives, also called Critical to Quality characteristics (CTQ’s), which should be addressed by the outputs of the process. Hence, the next chapter would reveal information about the characteristics displayed by incident managers while working to restore service when an incident occurs. Trying to follow the steps indicated in the DMAIC methodology, will be described the measuring in Solving Time for incidences and then analyze the causes that produce variability on it. After that, reviewing the incident management procedures, several changes will be proposed to make important improvements. Description of the Service Department 19 CHAPTER 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SERVICE DEPARTMENT 3.1 Company Background Rboard - Information Systems is an international leader in the development and provision of software solutions and specialized services for the computerization of firms of the packaging, corrugated board, carton, paper conversion and flexography sectors. This company has specialized in ERP software in management solutions, which at present counts over 160 important installations worldwide at leading firms in the packaging and paper conversion sector. It was established in 1981 and currently employs around 150 people in Italy and Spain, providing a host of services such as Consultancy, Assistance and Training by a Centre of Competence comprising many multidisciplinary experts. The Rboard business concept is presented here: “Rboard’s mission is to enhance and develop global leadership in ERP systems and services for the manufacturing cardboard sectors. The aim is to be the best in the industry at: – providing customer value, – developing capabilities in employees – creating shareholder value.” Rboard’s attitude and commitment to quality is communicated through its Quality Policy: “Aim for total quality in everything we do: market only systems and services that will ensure customer satisfaction by: – Operating reliable and capable processes, – Maintaining a program of continuous improvement.” Rboard’s largest individual customer is Smurfit Kappa. Other important customers are in different segments worldwide, for example, recycling paper industries, paper mills and flexography and cardboard sectors. 3.1.1 Service Department This thesis is focused on the subsidiary at Rboard’s Customer Service System (CSS), in a Service Department which comprises 12 engineers and 10 programmers in Italy and 2 engineers and 2 programmers in Spain (Fig. 3.1). This department is provided as a part of its Customer Relationship Management. Its function is to supervise the installation, customization, evaluation, training and solving incidences using the ERP system; also it is divided into two sections: Help Desk and Programming. Process Analysis 27 CHAPTER 4. PROCESS ANALYSIS The reviews of processes observed can be divided into two basic paradigms; namely quantitative and qualitative [20]. According to this author, these two types of inquiry are sometimes viewed as competing views about the ways in which social reality ought to be studied, and at other times as different ways of conducting social investigations. In summary, quantitative analysis main concerns are reliability, objectivity, representativeness, generalizability, replication and validity of investigation’s findings. Hence, the above inform about the method that was followed in this study, in which both a qualitative and a quantitative dimension were used as an approach. This involved document analysis, and individual interviews and questionnaire surveys 4.1 Procedure followed in the Service Department The study requires evaluating employees’ perceptions on the implemented Customer Service System (CSS) at Rboard, to assess the methodology used to develop, implement and maintain the service quality management. The Rboard Company approved to obtain information about its main activities, both in Spain as in Italy offices. But the main condition is to identify this Company using a pseudonym. Valuable data was obtained in some cases, but limited in access to the Customer Service System of the ERP that they implement in their Customers. The information led to conclude that its IT Service Management has an incident management team that would not be large enough to deal the broad spectrum of actual and future unplanned outages. It was possible to arrange a meeting with three of the senior corporate executives at Rboard in Spain and Italy, who, in turn, met with the corporation legal representatives to obtain approval to extend informal invitations to a subset of its employees to participate in the surveys. Complete anonymity was assured to both the corporation whose employees participated in the meetings, queries and surveys and to each individual participant of the Service Department. The selected area within this Company was granted and accessed through a formal introduction by the office of Italian CEO. This CEO mandated the Service Department to coordinate the review of its procedures, and be the point of contact between the whole organization and myself. This process was then progressed by a physical visit and formal introduction to the Service Departments, In Italy and Spain, which in turn identified all the three areas where the CSS had been implemented. Fortunately, in both these areas was proved to be an important task as 28 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process everybody involved in the intervention was concerned about knowing the effects of the program in Lean in Service Management (LSM) on the organization, and they were willing to assist in the surveys. The CEO also viewed this review as a tool that could be used to make a decision on whether the LSM program should rolled out to other areas, as planned in their medium and long-term strategic objectives. The final aim of the measure phase is to baseline process capability and potential through the development of clear and meaningful measurement systems. The first obstacle to overcome is how it is going to measure the current process performance since there are neither established performance indicators nor automatized data collection plans in place. Rboard has not been making use of a reliable method of recording either the incidences working-on times or the precise reasons of clients complains , which would allow to understand the statistical “conduct” of the process. 4.2 Data Collection Method There were two phases. Phase one of the study was quantitative in nature, and these involved questionnaire surveys, whereas phase two was qualitative and involved individual interviews of employees. 4.2.1 Non-probabilistic sampling This study used non-random sampling, also known as a purposive or judgmental sampling method, to sample the areas and the individual interview participants [20]. In total, two different regional areas, and the Service Department which is based at the head office, were chosen as the geographical areas of the study. Choosing these areas was convenience because it is concerned with persons involved in implementing the Customer Service System. This means that the employees in this department have first-hand information on the method that was used to develop and implement the quality in service management system. 4.2.2 Distribution of questionnaires and individual interviews. The following steps were followed in conducting individual interviews and in the distribution of the questionnaires:  recruitment of participants;  interview and questionnaire distribution setting;  interview and questionnaire guide. In the two regional areas, there is Help Desk and Programming departments, which comprise the Service Department (see Fig. 3.1). In Spain, 2 individual interviews were conducted in each of the two departments (4 in total), followed Process Analysis 29 by 5 individual interviews in Italy, 1 CEO, 2 Help Desk engineers and 2 Programmers. In total, 11 interviews undertaken. In each, Help Desk and Programming, was interviewed the team leader, purposively selected for the interviews due to the fact that team leaders are the core of development and implementation of the quality in customer management system. In this study, participants were drawn from those staff members who were regularly exposed to the customer’s attention and had something to say about it. It should be noted that questionnaire surveys were conducted also in the two regional areas. The number of questionnaires was distributed in this way: Spain, 5 questionnaires (4 same previous members and 1 CEO); Italy, 4 in Help Desk and 2 in Programming staff, none of them participated in the interview. The distribution is shown in the next table. Table 4.1. Distribution of individuals for interviews Area Date Function Total Spain October 2013 to Nov. 2013 Help Desk 2 Spain October 2013 to Nov. 2013 Programming 2 Italy Nov. 2013 to Dec. 2013 Help Desk 2 Italy Nov. 2013 to Dec. 2013 Programming 2 Italy Nov. 2013 to Dec. 2013 CEO 1 Table 4.2. Distribution of individuals for questionnaires Area Date Function Total Spain October 2013 to Nov. 2013 Help Desk 2 Spain October 2013 to Nov. 2013 Programming 2 Spain October 2013 to Nov. 2013 CEO 1 Italy Nov. 2013 to Dec. 2013 Help Desk 4 Italy Nov. 2013 to Dec. 2013 Programming 2 4.2.3 The interview guide The interviews guide, administered in English, was developed using the 6 DMAIC phases of developing and implementing a Six Sigma. The interview guide’s purpose was to serve as a guideline to chart the course of the interview from the beginning to the end. This meant that the interview guide was like an agenda. The guide was prepared in advance to avoid a situation which it was possible to forget essential points as well as to keep the focus of the group on subjects relevant to the objectives. The model of interview is in Appendix 1 In the preparation of a clear interview guide, the aim was to evaluate the interviewee’s perceptions of Lean concepts and quality in service management, on whether it was perceived to have improved the operational efficiency of the department. An effort was made to ensure consistency in the use of the guide in all individuals interviews held during the study. There no was time to carry on piloted interviews previous the actuals. 30 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process 4.2.4 The Questionnaire Drafting questions is a crucial aspect of developing any assessment instrument since what you ask for is what you get. With regard to the development of standardized tests, questions should be short and concise, relevant to objectives. The model of questionnaire is in Appendix 2. As with the interview guide, the same method used for developing an interview guide was used. Also the 6 fundamental concepts of developing and implementing Lean Six Sigma were used to develop the questionnaire. The questionnaire, administered in English, elicited responses from staff members to evaluate their perceptions of whether the implemented management service was perceived to have improved the operational efficiency and measures the quantity in loss incidences. In this way, was obtained an indirect view of the way as the customer observes the service offered by Rboard’s Service Department and a measure for customer complaints. For additional information about data reliability and validity, see Annex 8. 4.3 Defining Performance Indicators As previously mentioned, it is necessary to develop metrics either called Performance Indicators, which reflect the performance of the service process. Based on the Critical to Quality (CTQ) features derived from the Voice of Customer (VOC), it concludes that the kind of data necessary to collect are the number of loss incidences and the customer complaints. The operational definitions of these Performance Indicators are mainly associated with the effectiveness of the process in the eyes of the customer. The customer is an external one, the Key User of the RPM, and he wishes the smooth performance of the whole service. However, a project should also have some indicators of performance that reflect the efficiency of the process from the internal perspective and such one could be the cost of poor service and especially the costs related to unnecessary working time on incidences. So, it is quite clear that is necessary to achieve a balance of measures covering speed, quality and cost. 1) Performance Indicator 1: Incidence Working-on time (minutes): It represents the time elapsed between the incidence is received (open ticket), due to any request of the Key User and the closure of it and return to normal activity. Detailed definition: Beginning of time: the time when an incident occurs and the RPM fails in any process, forcing the users and Key User to either repair it himself or ask for the technical assistance to the Help Desk. End of time: the time that the RPM returns under normal operation. 2) Performance Indicator 2: Number of customer complaints (occurrences): The number of occurrences of a contact of Key Users or users of RPM. Process Analysis 31 Detailed definition: Any time the Key User asks for a non-provided solution, for a solution provided but not-tested, for a solution that does not work well or it is a no final and absolutely resolute solution that is not repeated in near future. The Performance Indicator 1 belongs to the “continuous” data because it is related to the measuring of a service characteristic, while the Performance Indicator 2 is of “count” data as it results from counting things. It is very important to know the different kinds of data involved in the project as it has implications for the type of tools and techniques that will be used later on analysing phase during the project. 4.4 Data measured A measurement to the Critical to Quality factors is made. The two first help to understand the Performance Indicator 1; the last one measures the occurrences in customer’s complaints along the last 12 months. 4.4.1 Availability It represents the percentage of time that each Help Desk section offers the service that it was deployed to provide. 󰇛󰇜  (4.1) A= Availability; M= Minutes per day; P= Planned outage minutes per day Table 4.3 provides the availability calculated for each section. Table 4.3 Calculating availability Item Section Minutes per day Planned outage (minutes per day) Availability Incidences Management 390 112 71,28% Help Desk Italy 390 30 92,31% Help Desk Spain 390 90 76,92% Programming 300 60 80,00% The sections have similar availability, but Help Desk Italy has more capacity to attend incidences, with its high 92% of availability. 4.4.2 Mean Time to Restore Service It can measure the mean duration from opening until closing the ticket, which means, the restore to normal service or operation. Hence, MTRS is the time taken to restore normal service to an acceptable operating level. 3 Tabl sect rec e Tab l Sec t Inci d Ma n Hel p Hel p Pro g In d e A ls o 4.4. 3 This type A B C A ll o han d sho w tend 0 50 100 150 2 l e 4.4 rev e ion has a e ive and di s l e 4.4 MT R It e t ion d ences n agement p Desk Ital y p De s g ramming e spite of I t o , 25% of i n 3 Cu s measure s of meas u A . Key Us e does n o concer n silence ” B . Solutio n C . Solutio n proble m o f them w e d ler progr a w ing the t d ency line a F 160 157 45 35 12 5 Jan Feb e als the dif f different c s patch ea c R S in Serv e m Worki n time ( m 390-1 1 y 390-3 0 s k 390-9 0 300-6 0 Perce n t aly team n cidences s tomer’s is related t u res: e r or any f o t asks, t h n ed about t ” n provided n provided m is still pr e e re extract e a m. The t otal of e a long the y F ig. 4.1. C h 154 155 1 35 30 53 Mar Apr Proposal of a   f erent val u c oncept f o c h inciden c ice Depar t n g-on m inutes) 1 2= 278 0 =360 0 =300 0 =240 n tage: attends fe are unsol v complai n t o Perform f inal user a h e solutio n t his situati o but not-te s and test e e sent in th e e d from in t results a r ach type y ear. h art showi n 1 68 156 1 4 45 30 83 May Jun a Lean Six Sig m    ∑     u es. In thi s o r MTRS, c e. t ment. Incidenc e number ( 28 6 16 6 100% e w inciden c v ed in 24 h n ts class m ance Indi c a sks for a s n is not p r o n and co u s ted by th e e d but ne e e RPM terviews a r e repres e of compl a n g types o 4 5140 14 5 32 45 5 37 Jul Aug S e m a methodolog y 󰇛  󰇜    case, the it refers t o e s n) n uns o 0 4 3 0 25% c es; their s h ours or le s ification c ato r 2. Th s till non-p r r ovided an u nts as if t h e Help De s e ds nea r -f u a nd super v e nted in t h a int by m f custome r 5 149 155 5 043 3 9 97 1 e pt Oct N o y implementatio Incidence o the me a o lved n sol v 28 2 13 6 75 % s olving ti m s s. e re are cl a ovided sol d Service h e Key Us s k team. u ture adju ising dire c h e next c m onth and r complain t 167 9 46 1 213 vDec o n in a Service P e s Manage a n time o f v ed MT R (min u 9-10 60 18-2 40 % m e is very a ssified in t l ution. Ev e Departm e s er is “waiti stments o c tly the In c c hart (Fig its resp e ts TypeA TypeB TypeC Tendenc y Tendenc y Tendenc y P rocess (4.2) ment f it to R S u tes) 0 high. t hree e n if it e nt is ng in o r the c ident 4.2), e ctive y (A) y (B) y (C) Analysis of Opportunities 33 CHAPTER 5. ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITIES The analysis in general went well; there were however some challenges encountered during the data collection. The first logistical challenge was to get permission to conduct the data gathering from the top management. It took about one month before the permission was granted and then only with restrictive conditions. Also, the complete results were obtained in January 2014, after more than one month of standby. The results of this study are derived from analysis of some Rboard’s document, the data derived through individual interviews and questionnaire surveys and from the study of the Incidences Software that the Company uses (see Annex 3). After the analysis, at the end of this chapter is presented the actual Lean VSM of the Incident Management process in the Service Department. 5.1 Analysis of data from interviews and questionnaires 5.1.1 Standards in procedures The Customer Service System and hence, the Service Department, does not follow Incidences Management procedure, as ITIL frameworks recommends. This was reviewed extensively in Chapter 4. The team in both regional areas felt that improvement of quality of service, speed of response in service, dependability and reliability of the service provided were main goals that the organization must reaches. Flexibility of the service provided could achieve a reduction of costs in hour/man for the Company. The number of complaints of the customers is increasing, having in a big impact on the image of the organization. Also, the teams are concerned about a next increment in new clients, which could not be attended properly, if a new procedure to improve the quality in service is not implemented early. The majority of the respondents, 100% in Spain and 70% in Italy, agreed with the fact that performance objectives, i.e., quality, speed, reliability and dependability of service delivered by the Service Department, including reduction of costs could be improved by the implementation of the a methodology like Lean Six Sigma, but there was a big differential between the two regional areas, that is, might have been brought about by inadequate training in the Italian area which was is less enthusiastic about the benefits of the intervention of improvement projects. Almost the total of interviewees knew their Quality Police: “Aim for total quality in everything we do: market only systems and services that will ensure customer satisfaction” and they accepted that the vision was well communicated through various means including the internet and posters. 34 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process The number of incidences not solved properly is the big concern of the Service Department. About 75% are solved in 24 hours or less but the remaining 25% is over 72 hours to resolve successfully. Also they know that near a 20% of the customers have complaints even if the incidence is solved or not and also they feel the time to response effectively is too high. They all answered that the quality performance and the level of satisfaction of the customer was measured internally, so surveys and benchmarking to customers have not been applied in a formal studies. However, due to nonavailability of objective evidence, it could not be verified the costs involved in loss service. It is said that identifying output variations is a key aspect of Lean Six Sigma because such deviations from quality standards are measured by the percentage of defective products, or in this case, of customer satisfaction, by on-time response percentages and customer survey ratings. Rboard Corporation is committed to reduce time wasting to zero and response all the incidences in less of 24 hours. 5.1.2 Causes and effects Both CEO’s regional departments were involved and committed to the implementation of the improve quality in Service Management. Italian chief knows about the communication problem between regional departments, both Help Desk and Programming, in spite of the frequent annual training in technical issues. All the Italian Help Desk and Programming members were concerned about the management capabilities of Spaniard CEO to carry out improvements, but they are sure about the concern of him to understand and please the customer’s requirements in time, quantity and quality. Besides, both regional CEO’s and the Director of Rboard rewards which are process-oriented, where improvements such as an improvement in speed, demonstrated by reduction in cycle time, customer satisfaction with product quality, flexibility and dependability of the goods and services are in place. That means, the rewards are based in performance objectives, linked to processoriented improvements, which reinforce the belief that continuous improvement will be sustained and this will ultimately develop into the organizational culture. With this analysis, it is possible to entitle the main causes and define the two metrics in the process of Service Management, which are shown the next Cause-Effects diagrams. Analysis of Opportunities 35 Loss incidence Training Help desk Admission Actions There is no enough documentation Rework Incidences not reported properly Wrong understanding in procedures Scheme to register is not efficient There is no enough staff Lack of information between regions Standardized procedures required Actual process is not efficient Registration and classification Closure and follow up Fig. 5.1. Cause and effect diagram for Loss Incidence Process Metric in the Service Management. Customer complaints Organization Training Service’s System Help Desk Customer attended by many departments There is no enough documentation Customer’s Key Users no trained Customers waits and asks repeatedly Wrong understanding in procedures No standardized way to report No follow up call back customers Staff needs training in quality management and incidences management Fig. 5.2. Cause and effect diagram for Customer complaints Process Metric in the Service Management. 5.1.3 Auto-evaluation results All the Spaniard team, by age or level of knowledge, is willing to apply any change in improvements. The Italian team, with more expertise and age, is more confident about its own procedures are not prepared to deep changes. The Italian chief could think in some change in motivations to be more collaborative with the Spaniard team. They all Spaniard team also agreed that the implementation of projects for improving quality (as Lean Six Sigma) could help to gear towards the improvement of all the organizational processes. They further indicated that the following quality improvement projects could be implemented to improve departmental processes: • Suggestion of a new scheme of Incidence Management, led to implementation of a system where incidences were solved in time. Previously the customer store incidences in a better labeled way, to be solved for any technician; • Standardization of incidence’s system in this department; • The suggested scheme gave members an opportunity to come up with value 36 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process adding suggestions. This initiative was well received by Italian teams. The interviewees knew that their perception of its vision was well communicated and also they thought the strategy and the people were focused towards that vision of improvements. Despite the actual problems, they feel the organisation performance was moving into the right direction. The team is confident about the performance management system, so they are sure about the customer’s level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Instead of it, they feel it is necessary more communication with the client after an incident is closed. The team in Spain is not as well motivated as the Italian team. They don’t understand and accept their superior performance and the feedback process is not clear at all. Interviewees accepted that the rewards and discipline measures used to extinguish unacceptable behaviour and encourage exceptional behaviour were working for the organisation. The recommendation is that organization should continue to give recognition of good performance through bonuses. According to one of the interviewees, a collective performance management system is better than an individual performance management system, the reason for this view is an observation that after the migration from an individual to collective systems, there was an improvement of about 100% in the Help Desk area (in Italy). All the interviewees said that they just did receive few training in Service Management together. Otherwise, the members from the Programming area only received in-house training, given by its supervisor. Department Senior managers (in Italy) should be willing to allocate resources to improve quality in implementation of incidences management, particularly to make investments in more long-term training, taking advantage of the high level of commitment of all the staff members. Incidence Management Improvements 43 a party is very responsive and helpful, but many times the local team has to be really persistent in order to obtain a single piece of information from the Italian technical team that is vital to solve the incidence. Having completed the notification and data collection tasks, it can now start data analysis. To start data analysis, first the company has to notify the parties involved and collect data from them. First inform those who may be the most affected. This notification includes some initial advice and information about further proceedings to resolve the incident.  Countermeasures: i) To start data analysis, first the company has to notify the parties involved and collect data from them, informing those who may be the most affected. ii) The notification must include some initial advice and information about further proceedings to resolve the incident. This must collect as much data as possible, iii) there are several main sources of such data: - Rboard’s monitoring system - Existing databases. - Incident reporter experience - Italian technical experience  Proposed situation: It is important to distribute this work properly within the team. In general, it considers two factors: a team member’s expertise and a team member’s current workload. The proper adjustment of these two actions will make and special improvement in the quality of service.  Action plan: i) with a well pre-filtered incidence it can be assigned to the proper solver; ii) give periodical training to Help Desk team.  Indicators: an identified route followed by each solver can be described in Incidence’s historic; then with it, the quality of data collected can be measured.  Closing: the success of solving an incidence very much depends on this part. 2) Resolution review  Goal: reduce part of the time used in each incidence.  Current State: the information is collected among all the possible observations that they contribute and the incident solver decide which ideas he will use for the resolution of the incident. No collaborative teams are present. Even better equipped members don’t share information as they should.  Countermeasures: i) During the data analysis phase, people must be collaborative exchanging their ideas, very often between Spaniard and Italian teams.  Proposed situation: The collection of data must be the just amount of it to avoid much more data and to limit the dependence of Italian teams, hence reducing time in solving.  Action plan: i) Establish internal incentives to Help Desk Members; ii) commitment to Managers to pay more attention to solvers requirements; iii) standards procedures and manuals are necessary to avoid constant change of information between regions.  Indicators: An identified route followed by each solver can be described in Incidence’s historic; then with it, the analysis phase time can be measured. 44 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process  Closing: Both Help Desk teams want more training in quality services and standards. 3) Actions proposed  Goal: effective and short answers in solutions.  Current State: each part in each client requires a special language and attention, so it is important to take into account the personal value that the solver member of the team can contribute on it.  Countermeasures: the incident solver must prepare a set of concrete and practical tasks for each part involved in the case.  Proposed situation: the solver must be able to manage languages from advanced technical terms until descriptive basic mode, in order to be sure that the incident owner understands the proposed set of actions.  Action plan: i) Is required training in quality management.  Indicators: an identified route followed by each solver can be described in Incidence’s historic; then with it, the effectiveness can be analyzed.  Closing: For more clarification, it is useful to develop a short list of possible actions for the customer. 4) Actions performed  Goal: to take advantage of actions that does not work at first time.  Current State: in practice most of the actions proposed will not be executed properly, because the parties are not under total control of the solver. Often they read a set of instructions by e-mail, so they do not act appropriately on the proposals. Often the Key Users read a set of instructions by e-mail, so they do not act appropriately on the proposals.  Countermeasures: i) Follow up actions proposed only if it is required, ii) do not open a new ticket for already problems solved.  Proposed situation: The technician must be able to monitor the execution of the actions by the traditional means, as phone, remote control or Skype™.  Action plan: when the solutions are not working properly it is a good time to firm up the relation with the customer.  Indicators: Carry out external surveys for measure customer satisfaction levels.  Closing: it is important maintain a closer relationship between Service Department and Customers. Also, tasks get involved with the customer can be done when the team has free time. 5) Eradication and recovery  Goal: the main objective pursued must be the total eradication of the incident, in a customer and in all the actual and possible future customers.  Current State: once solution is proposed, tested but still do not checked. The Solver asks repeatedly to the Customer for more relevant information, which incurs in waste of time.  Countermeasures: to test and check solution without customer intervention.  Proposed situation: It is a suggested practice to Rboard to check as much Incidence Management Improvements 45 as possible and get a positive confirmation form each party that in their opinion everything is operating normally again.  Action plan: i) Store solutions in database; ii) complete manuals with previous solutions; iii) create in the webpage question-answer help customized for each customer.  Indicators: i) Reduce unsolved incidents to 0% in 24 hours. ii) Carry out external surveys for measure customer satisfaction levels.  Closing: The real resolution of a problem is to recover or restore to normality the service that was affected during the incident. 6.1.5 Improvement 5: Closure of the Incident  Background: solutions remain in Database as “not solved”, even the Key User already has the solution. Sometimes it occurs that customers are not warned properly for ticket closed, or even other solvers are working in a problem that has been solved.  Goal: once the incident resolution cycle is left behind, only solver is capable to close it properly.  Current State: Key User has to close the ticket by itself. In some occasions it has to ask several times for solutions.  Countermeasures: once the solution is tested and checked, close the ticket and inform immediately the solutions set to the Key User involved.  Proposed situation: the closure inform must include a short description of the incident, including its classification for further references, the results of the solver, if it was resolved properly or not and notes about recommendations.  Action plan: close tickets must generate an automatic alert to the customer and other solvers in Help desk team. Adjust the program and methodology of closure.  Indicators: time life of each ticket. It must be reduced in 30%.  Closing: This correct procedure offers to the Customer a clear vision about the Customer Service System of Rboard, improving the quality of the service. 6.2 Long-term improvements The aim of a Control phase is to gain a long-term good performance, reducing the waste previously mentioned. Without this phase, the short-term improvements for the process will turn back to its original status, and the improvement result will not last too long. In any case, these activities will leads to the management team to continue with the methodology proposed in a long term application:  Lessons learnt during improvement should be stored as a part of the company asset.  Apply improvements. Control tool: checklist to audit if processes are properly followed or not. 46 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process  Conduct external surveys to evaluate performance.  Implement standardized protocols in regions to avoid problems happen again.  Conduct new goals for further improvements.  Spread successful Six Sigma ideas to other departments or projects.  Create its own Six Sigma projects guidelines for the future.  Enhance operators’ sense of quality in service.  Conduct more training about standard operations To implement a strategy for continuous improvement is mandatory. Although the process has been improved and the problems have been solved, is not known whether the process will turn back to its original statement. Furthermore, the improvement of quality will never end. To keep a long term improvement and to avoid the solved problem happens again, setting down a strategy is necessary to keep continuous improvement, for instance, establishing standards to standardize Help Desk employee’s behavior. In the other hand, in this project of improvements, there were main problems trying to observe the DMAIC methodology and Lean concepts for the Service Department:  Until now, non-standardized procedures had been utilized.  Inconsistency in document control, as well as the maintenance of service process and incident’s performance records.  When work within incidents, they were taken over by a different member of staff; therefore, many steps had to be duplicated to ascertain exactly what had been done on a case. Duplication and rework caused capacity to be employed in unproductive efforts (Muri concept)  Different regions are not adopting unique methods to perform work resulting in unique capacity planning methods and uneven utilization. (Mura concept). Incidence Management Improvements _________________________________________________ 47 6.3 Improved VSM diagram of Incident Management process in Rboard’s Service Department. Fig. 6.3. Improved Lean VSM of Service Department in Rboard. 48 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process CONCLUSIONS This project has followed a method for Lean Six Sigma implementation to find improvements in service process. It is proven that service companies can follow steps in this method to apply Six Sigma approach to improve their processes. To show the state-of-art of Six Sigma approach, author has conducted one Service Department’s interview and analyze two case studies which came from service and other fields. In this interview and studies process, author found an amazing coincidence. The usage of Six Sigma approach in those interview and cases are almost same, including the selection of methodology and Six Sigma activities. This finding gave a big help on generating the general method for Lean Six Sigma Service implementation. According to the documents analyzed the methodology of developing, implementing an maintaining a Lean Six Sigma Methodology at this organization was slightly different from the literature in a sense that only three phases were used, which the literature regards as fundamental: Define, Measure and Improvement phases. Also, regarding to the analyzed documents, this Company undertook an operational capability analysis to improve business performance and build steady state operations within the offices and across different regions. This exercise revealed that there was little uniformity in the manner in which the work was conducted. The analysis also showed that the operational environment was characterized by disparate islands of processes and information with different offices, regions and business areas operating divorced from each other. Although in some processes there were existing procedures that had to be followed, they were not carried out in a standardized and consistent manner as their roll-out and implementation was not done in a systematic way. Another connection, according to the main author in Lean Six Sigma, Michael George [6], the slow rate of corporate improvement is not due to lack of knowledge of Six Sigma or Lean. Rather, the fault lies in making the transition from theory to implementation. Managers need a step-by-step, unambiguous roadmap of improvement that leads to predictable results. Analyzing the successful application of this methodology in cases reviewed, it took at least 5 years of try and review to tune in the procedures of whole company. The reasons for adopting Six Sigma are clear: fewer defects, faster delivery and increased customer satisfaction [3]. Lean helps to identify wastes. The more familiar with the incident process is the management, the higher productivity is obtained. The differences between Service and Manufacturing are obvious and unavoidable. Despite of manufacturing product can easily be measured as weight, distance, quantity, etc.; the service characteristics such as defects number or Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) usability cannot be simply measured. Even the Cycle Time concept is changed by Working time, Availability and MTRS, hence Six Sigma approach can be applied in service Conclusions ______________________________________________ 49 departments and companies if we involve the right people, solving the right problem, and using the right method. At the same time, although using Six Sigma approach for process improvement does not costs a lot, it worth. Few incidents, faster attention time and increased customer satisfaction will generate more potential profits than is thought. Since Six Sigma focuses on the quality from the beginning of a project so it has minimal cost to improve quality. On the other hand if it waits up to the testing phase in finding the defects then the cost to fix the defects is very high. A cost and benefit analysis should be done in the Six Sigma program to determine the actual gains. While investigated the concept of Six Sigma approach, author found that Six Sigma approach had three forms for quality improvement. The first form is as a metric which equals to 3.4 defects per million opportunities. This is a requirement for the highest quality level. The final aim of Six Sigma is to reach this defect degree. The second form of Six Sigma approach is as a methodology. It basically provides two models for process improvement. DMAIC model is used for existed process improvement, while DMADV model can be used in new process development. The last form is as a management system, which is binding with company’s business strategy. Six Sigma is best used in process or production industry, and many of the statistical tools have a direct and good use. The challenge was to employ Six Sigma in Service processes. The main challenge was to identify the CTQs metrics, be able to identify root causes, and measure improvements. Another challenge was that the processes used have irregular long life span and the processes are furthermore not to be easily classified as stable and repeatable. Then the analysis resulting is mixed into a method for applying Six Sigma approach the Service Department. Two main parts are involved – environment establishment and the enhanced methodology. The first part provides to Service Department a top-down introduction for Six Sigma framework. By learning that, the Service Management team can build its own framework. The other part is an enhanced methodology. Previous authors have integrated lessons learned from the analysis with the DMAIC model, which makes the model contain Service characteristics. This method is believed can handle all general cases. Then DMAIC has been selected as a model for organizing this Six Sigma project. Analysis findings and service properties have been integrated with the selected model. Its functionality has been enhanced to meet company requirements on incidence attention. Activities and quality tools were blended with each step in each model phase. By the purpose of practicability and authenticity, most of them came from interviews and case study reviews. As a final conclusion, Rboard needs to establish some necessary standards or rules to keep continuous improvement. In essence, this analysis provides an initial roadmap that tells the Lean Six Sigma implementation team: “Where do I start from?” “What to do?”, “How to do?” and help them in doing the first steps in this successful methodology. 50 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process BIBLIOGRAPHY [1] Lean Services for Defense & National Security http:/www.fujitsu.com/uk/solutions/industries/defence/defenceconsultancy/defence-lean-services.html [2] Liker J.K., The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill (2004). [3] Martin, James W., Lean Six Sigma for the Office. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, FL (2009). [4] Taleghani, M., “Key factors for implementing the lean manufacturing system” in Department of Management, Islamic Azad University - Rasht Branch, IRAN., pp. 1–5, (2010). http://es.scribd.com/doc/50157798/null [5] Maleyeff, J., Improving Service Delivery in Government with Lean Six Sigma. IBM Center for The Business of Goverment, pp. 1–48, (2007). [6] George, M., Lean Six Sigma for Service. How to use Lean Speed and Six Sigma quality to improve services and transactions. McGraw-Hill, (2003). [7] The Evolution of Six Sigma. Process Quality Associates Inc. (2006). http://www.pqa.net/ProdServices/sixsigma/W06002009 [8] EMS Consulting Group (2004). http://www.emsstrategies.com/dm050104article2.html [9] Seddon, J.,O’Donovan, B., Zokaei, K., Rethinking Lean Service., pp. 1–22, (2009). [10] Jones, D. and Womack, J., Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation. Free Press. 2nd Edition, (2010) [11] Bowen, D. and Youngdahl, W., “Lean” service: in defense of a productionline approach", International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 9 Iss: 3, pp.207 – 225. [12] Burgess, N., Evaluating Lean in Healthcare. University of Warwick, Warwick Business School. (2012). [13] Mustafa, E. and Talib Bon, A., Impact of Total Quality Management on Innovation in Service Organizations, Malaysian Technical Universities Conference on Engineering & Technology 2012, MUCET (2012). Bibliography 51 [14] Skalle, H. and Hahn, B., Applying Lean, Six Sigma, BPM, and SOA to Drive Business Results. Reedbook. IBM Corp. (2013) [15] Pepper, M. and Spedding, T., The evolution of lean Six Sigma. University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia. (2009) [16] IT Service Management http://www.itservicemanagement-itil.com/tracer/itilv3-alignment/ [17] ITIL Incident management [Visit Date: January 2nd, 2014]: http://www.itlibrary.org/index.php?page=Incident_Management [18] ITIL Incident Management http://www.teamquest.com/resources/itil/service-support/incidentmanagement/ [19] ENISA: European Network and Information Security Agency, Good Practice Guide for Incident Management, pp. 2–110, (2010) http://www.enisa.europa.eu/ [20] Bryman, A., Quantity y Quality in Social Research, Ed. Routledge, Londres. (1.988) [21] Hopkins, W., Summarizing Data: Precision of Measurement. (2000). [Visit Date: January 12nd, 2014]: http://www.sportsci.org/resource/stats/precision.html [22]Terre, M.J., Terre, M., Durrheim, K., Painter, D., Research in Practice: Applied Methods for the Social Sciences, Juta and Company Ltd, (2.006) [23] Devane T., Integrating Lean Six Sigma and High-Performance Organizations: Leading the charge toward dramatic, rapid and sustainable improvement, Pfeiffer & Co. (2004) [24] Smith, B., Lean and Six Sigma – A One-Two Punch. Quality Progress. (2003). [25] Tonini, A., Spinola, M. and Laurindo, F., Six Sigma and Software Development Process: DMAIC Improvements, Technology Management for the Global Future, PICMET (2006). [26] DMAIC and DMADV http://www.sixsigmatraining.org/dmaicdmadv and http://www.sixsigmaonline.org/six-sigma-training-certificationinformation/articles/understanding-six-sigma-dmaic-and-dmadv-models.html 52 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process [Visit Date: January 20nd, 2014] [27] "Six Sigma Quality Tools and Templates," iSixSigma, http://www.isixsigma.com/tools-templates/ [Visit Date: January 22nd, 2014] [28] "Cause and effect diagrams," HCi Library. http://hci.com.au/hcisite5/library/materials/Cause%20and%20effect%20diagr ams.htm. [Visit Date: January 22nd, 2014]. [29] K. Niles, "Characterizing the Measurement Process," iSixSigma, 2008. http://www.isixsigma.com/tools-templates/measurement-systems-analysismsa-gage-rr/characterizing-measurement-process/ [Visit Date: January 22nd, 2014] [30] Jiju, A., Maneesh, K., Byung Rae, C., Six Sigma in service organizations, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 1–18 (2007). [31] Park, S., Six Sigma for Quality and Productivity promotion. APO, (2003) [32] Murugappan, M., Keeni, G., Blending CMM and Six Sigma to meet business goals. Tata Consultancy Services. IEEE Software, pp. 42-48. (2003). [33] Trochim, W., “Research Methods Knowledge Base” Cornell University, http://csi.ufs.ac.za/resres/files/Trochim.pdf [Visit Date: January 24nd, 2014] [34] Reliability and Validity http://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja &ved=0CFsQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ceecis.org%2Fremf%2FServi ce3%2Funicef_eng%2Fmodule5%2Fdocs%2F5-1-1_reliability-andvalidity.doc&ei=LMbqUv7dD6WI7AbSlYB4&usg=AFQjCNE6Qv-Mt_YTe3hPMA7Hfgg8AH-lA&bvm=bv.60444564,d.ZGU [Visit Date: January 24nd, 2014] F r e F ig. 3.2 Incide n e direct the Inci n t Manager. In c i dence to a sp e c idences filter e e cific Departm e 60 e d by Helper. N e nt. N ote the Urgen c Proposal of a c ies and Statu s Lean Six Sigma met h s classification s h odology implementa t s . The last on e t ion in a Service Proc e e is used to e ss A F T A nnex F ig. 3.3 Incide n T here is a spa c n t Manager. In c c e to add com m c idence opene d m ents from Hel d . The name a per that could w ssigned and t h w ork in further 61 h e historical de t classifications t ails of this Inc , not only for s idence are sh o olving. o wn. 62 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process ANNEX 4. TYPES OF WASTE This list is developed combining different authors’ viewpoints. Firstly, the seven types of wastes are identified and described to let the reader understand the meaning in terms of manufacturing and service perspective. Then it follows with some examples in different kind of organizations. After explaining the seven types of wastes, another new waste in service is described followed with examples. Table 1. Types of waste. Waste type Description Examples Transportation Manufacturing perspective: It is the movement of materials which is not needed, because their chance to get damaged and deteriorated increases [10]. ●The movement of materials on and off site without a need; and movement of intermediate product in the site [2]. Service perspective: It means the movement of materials and information, which should be reduced for activities that do not add value, or are related to occurrence of waiting time and queues that dissatisfy customers [6]. ●In banks, many people face the problem of transportation because they have to collect materials and information by asking different people until they reach the right person [6]. ●In healthcare, it can be the distance of transport of test samples because of the centralized resources in organizations [12]. Motion Manufacturing perspective: It happens when there are unnecessary movements of people and machines [10]. ● Double handling of materials in the organizations [10]. Service perspective: It does not add value to services, because it only takes additional time and cost related to unnecessary movement of employees. The motion is very hard to measure in service sector [6]. ●People have to go from one computer to another to complete a task [6]. ●Searching for people and equipments which are placed within long distance [12]. Annex 63 Over processing Manufacturing perspective: Organizations using big machines, which are not efficient with low quality that causes defects. So, organization should focus on long term and purchase smaller and simpler machines that fit to the capacity needed based on customers’ demand [10]. ●The variation between operators, which causes the machine to be used for several lines [10]. Service perspective: It includes excess costs with attempt to add more value to service than is needed to satisfy customers [6]. ●If a store wraps clothing item in a layer of tissue, this might work in boutique that target high income people, but not in retail stores where people want to pay as less as possible [6]. ●In healthcare, acquiring numerous test samples from patients, which are unnecessary [12]. Inventory Manufacturing perspective: It involves the over existence of raw materials, WIP and finished goods in organizations. This is considered waste because of the excess of cost spend on them [10]. ●The excess of inventory compared to the quantity that was specified them [10]. ●Large warehouse occupied with inventory in the site. When employees are unable to provide services according to customer’s requirements due to lack of supplies them [10]. Service perspective: It means using excess inventory instead of what is actually required to provide service to customers. This should be avoided because it does not add value to customers and involves higher cost of waiting. This kind of waste is usually a result of overproduction [6]. ●Providing substitute of products or services, not what was asked by customers them [10]. Defect Manufacturing perspective: It involves any waste which involves costs related to delay, warranty and repairs [10]. ●Rework, customers’ complaints, or even loss of customers [10]. ●Higher operating costs [10]. Service perspective: It happens when services are not performed ●A lack of information or inaccurate process of documentation can cause delays which dissatisfy customers 64 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process within specification of customers. Some of the services are not costly to correct mistakes, but organizations should consider that they might also lose customers [6]. [6]. ●In healthcare, infections that patients get due to lack of hygiene and poor treatment [12]. Waiting (time on hand) Manufacturing perspective: It is considered an enemy of flow, because materials and components do not move as a result of waste [10]. ●Operators or employees waiting for something; materials waiting in a queue; and late delivery [10]. Service perspective: It involves a delay in one activity, which causes a delay in the following activity. The value stream mapping technique is useful to identify process delays. Organizations can analyze the waiting time by looking at each activity in the process to identify delays [6]. ●Waiting in the meeting for people who show up late, which lead to irritation and loss of time in which work could be performed [12]. ●In healthcare, patients waiting in the queues [12]. Overproduction Manufacturing perspective: It involves producing too much, or just in case it is needed without being focused on customers’ demand. This leads to excessive lead times and deterioration of products [10]. ●The area of space that is needed and used in the warehouse [2]. Service perspective: It means the excess production of service outputs [6]. This happens because organizations produce more services than customers want. ●Entering unnecessary information for organization [12]. ●In healthcare, patients are admitted to the hospital and they wait because there is no time to give them service till later [12]. Unused employee creativity Service perspective: It happens when organization losing time, ideas, skills, improvements, and learning opportunities by not engaging or listening to their employees [2]. ●The loss of skilled employees that could contribute for organizational improvement [12]. ●Not using the creativity of people; not paying attention to ideas of employees, but only managers [6]. IT I n Offi c a fr a and bus ask s min an Offi c Sin c Ho w in f Ser v rep r oth e As s sta g it c Co n buil t bus Le a In c Inci d can 66 n frastruct u ce of Gov e a mework f d continual iness and s and ch imum lev e plan, impl e cial site) T c e its sta r w ever, the ive basic v ice Tran r esent an I e rs. Figure s een from g e where t h irculates c n tinual Pro t continua l iness with a n method o c ident M a d ent Man a be a que r A N u re Library e rnment C o f or the go v improve m a custo m ecklists s u e l of comp e e ment, de m his proces s r t in the core appr o processes sition an d I TIL servic e 4.1 illustr a Fig. 5.1, t h h e busine s c yclically t cess Impr o l feedback the meas u o logy, whi c Fi a nagem e a gement ( I r y, questio n Proposal o N NEX 5. (ITIL®) is o mmerce f v ernance o m ent of th e m er persp e u ggested e tency for m onstrate s-based fr a late 80s, o ach to th e : Service d Continu e lifecycle, a tes the pr o h e lifecycl e s s needs a hrough th e o vement. E system t o u rable val u c h requires g. 5.1. ITI L e nt I M) is the n or failur e o f a Lean Six Si g ITIL F R a collecti o f or IT Ser v o f IT servi c e quality o e ctive (ITI L for use i Service M a complian c a mework i s several I T e ITIL gui d Strategy, al Servic e each of t h o cesses o f e of an IT s nd require m e Service E very sta g o guarante u e continu o continuou L framewo r ITIL proc e e (existed o g ma methodolo g R AMEW O o n of best v ice Mana g c e and foc u o f the serv L 2007). I T n organiz a a nageme n c e and m e s adopted T IL versio n d ance stay s Service D e Improv e h e five infl u f ITIL fram e s ervice sta m ents for a Design, T g e of a se r e that the o usly. This s improve m r k. Source e ss for de a o r possibl e g y implementat i O RK practices p g ement (IT u ses on th ice delive r T IL descri b a tions for n t, so that t e asure im p in many o r n s have b s unchang esign, Se r e ment. T h u encing a n e work. rts at the S a service a T ransition, r vice’s life c service is procedur e m ent. [16] a ling with i e one) rela t i on in a Service p roduced b SM). It pr o e measur e r ed from b b es proce d establish t he organi z p rovement. r ganizatio n b een pro d ed and co r vice Ope r h ese proc e n d relying o S ervice St r a re set, an d Operatio n c ycle has a able to p r e is similar i ncidents, w t ed to a s e Process b y UK o vides e ment b oth a d ures, ing a z ation (ITIL n s. d uced. nsists r ation, e sses o n the r ategy d then n and a n inr ovide to the w hich e rvice. Annex 67 Thus, the main goal of Incident Management is to restore service as soon as possible and to minimize impact of incidents on business to ensure the best possible quality and availability level of a service. By incidents, ITIL means any unplanned interruptions to an IT service or a reduction in its quality (ITIL 2007). Incidents can be reported by users, technical staff and event monitoring tools. When dealing with incidents, the main concepts associated with them are Impact, Urgency and priority level [16]. IM is primarily a reactive process, its processes provide guidance on diagnostic and escalation procedures required to quickly restore services. Incident Management activities include [18]:  Detecting and recording incident details  Matching incidents against known problems  Resolving incidents as quickly as possible  Prioritizing incidents in terms of impact and urgency  Escalating incidents to other teams as appropriate to ensure timely resolution. Incidents and Service Requests are formally managed through a staged process to conclusion. This process is referred to as the "Incident Management Lifecycle". The objective of the Incident Management Lifecycle is to restore the service as quickly as possible to meet Service Level Agreements. The process is primarily aimed at the user level [17]. In this project, the Incident Management is used as a reference to give a structure to the process observed and defined in Rboard’s Service Department. 68 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process ANNEX 6. SIX SIGMA DMADV MODEL DMADV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Design and Verify) model was developed by Thomas Pyzdekis. This model is applied to the development of new processes or products. The phases of DMADV are described below [26]:  Define phase is to find out the customer needs and expectations and to define the project scope.  Measure phase is to identify the CTQs (critical to qualities), process capability and risk assessment.  Analyze phase is to develop the high level design concepts and design alternatives to select the best design.  Design phase is to develop plans for test verification, this may require simulations.  Verify phase is to implement the process in operational scale. Annex 69 ANNEX 7. Techniques and tools in Six Sigma In this part, most of those tools and techniques will be explained. In the next table are shown the different tools generally associated with each respective phase of DMAIC methodology. The functionality of main tools is described further. Table 2.1. Distribution of tools in Six Sigma [6, 27, 30, 31]. Phase of Six Sigma Tool Define Cause-effect Diagram, Pareto Chart, Brainstorming, Affinity Diagram, SIPOC Diagram Measure Flow Chart, Histogram, Check Sheet, Spreadsheet, MSA, VOC Method Analyze Flow Chart, Pareto Chart, Cause-effect Diagram, Histogram, Control Chart, Process Mapping, Kano Analysis Implement Scatter Plot, Control Chart, Project Management Methods, FEMA, Stakeholder Analysis, Process Documentation Control Control Chart, Flow Chart, ANOVA, Correlation and Regression, DOE. 7.1 Check Sheet The check sheet is used to collect data of the desired characteristics of a process that should be improved. If the collected data is incorrect, most efficient methods will result in a failure. In Six Sigma methodology it is used in the measure phase. The check sheet is represented in a tabular form. The check sheet should be simple and aligned with the characteristics that are to be measured [20, 27, 31]. 7.2 Pareto Chart The Pareto chart was introduced by Joseph M. Juran in 1940s. Juran named it after the Italian statistician and economist Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923). There are several quality problems to be addressed in a project. Often the problems are solved one by one. The Pareto chart helps in deciding the order of problems in which they should be solved. Pareto chart is related to the 80/20 rule found in business economics. The 80% of problems are because of 20% of causes [20, 27, 31]. In the Six Sigma methodology, Pareto chart has two main functions. Firstly in the define phase it helps in the selection of the appropriate problem. Secondly in analyzes phase it helps in identifying the few causes that lead to many problems. 70 Proposal of a Lean Six Sigma methodology implementation in a Service Process 7.3 Histogram Histogram is used in Six Sigma in the analyze phase. It is used to learn about the distribution of the data collected in the measure phase. Often we have huge data and each observation cannot be represented in figure. With the help of histogram the collected data is divided into different classes or intervals. The area of each rectangle in the histogram is proportional to the number of observations within each interval or class. So if we sum the areas of all rectangles it is equal to total number of observations [20, 27, 31]. When applying a histogram there should be at least 50 readings to get a good understandable shape of distribution. The number of intervals or classes should be between 6 and 12. To get the intervals it is good to take the difference of highest and lowest value in the data. If there are too many or too less data values or intervals then the histogram will be of a flat or peaked shape [20, 27]. 7.4 Stratification Stratification is used to divide the collected data into subgroups. These subgroups help in finding the special cause of variation in the data. It provides an easy way to analyze the data from different sources in a process. It is used very less as compare to other quality tools but it is beneficial. In the Six Sigma methodology it is used in the improve phase. The collected data is usually stratified in the following groups: machines, material, suppliers, shifts, age and so on. Usually stratification is done in two areas but if the data is large than further stratification is also possible [20, 27]. 7.5 Cause and Effect Diagram The cause and effect diagram is also known as fishbone diagram or an Ishikawa diagram. It was introduced by Dr Kaoru Ishikawa in 1943, while working in a quality program at Kawasaki Steel Works in Japan [20, 27]. Once we have a quality problem its causes must be found. Cause and effect Diagram helps to find out all the possible causes of an effect (problem). It is the first step in solving a quality problem, by listing all the possible causes. In Six Sigma it is used in the define phase and analyze phase [20, 27, 28, 31]. The reason that Cause and Effect Diagram is also called Fishbone Diagram is that it looks like a skeleton of a fish. The main problem is the head of the fish, the main causes are Ribs and the detailed causes are the small bones. 7.6 Control chart The Control chart was introduced by Walter A. Shewhart in 1924. Industry is