1b project ms v2
TRANSCRIPT
LCS/OEE Lean Accreditation Scheme
Lean Practitioner Evidence Portfolio
© OEE 2013
2
LCS/OEE Lean Accreditation Scheme Lean Practitioner Evidence Portfolio
Name Malcolm SandersOrganisation HP Date 01/06/2015
© OEE 2013
3
Background and Experience
Please summarise your experience of implementing Lean tools and techniques in service organisations
(Duration, organisations, positions held)
Assisted in lean methodology implementation into Waltham Cross and Linford sites:• Performance meetings• CI • 5S• Performance measuring • Process mapping/NVA • Process Confirmation• Encourage staff involvement
Please list any relevant qualifications that you already hold
1A accreditation 07/06/2013
Have you previously applied for Lean Accreditation, through oee or any other body?
If so, what was the outcome?
As per above 1A accreditation, this was in conjunction with RBS Group through Cardiff University.
Please provide some background information to help us understand your experience
© OEE 2013
4
Overview of Portfolio
Tool or Technique Evidenced Team/Department/Area Implemented Types of Evidence Submitted
Process Mapping- 2 levelsRemoval of NVA stepsUnderstanding & influencing customer expectationsDMAIC in relation to Waste Spotting
Business Performance - MI See attached PPT
Please list on this page the contents of your Portfolio
© OEE 2013
5
Understanding Lean Thinking
In your own words, define “Lean” and describe how you would implement Lean effectively and sustainably into an organisation. Your answer should fit into the box below.
I would define Lean as a way in which to identify and remove areas of risk and process deficiencies, improve work flow and eliminate waste and striving to be the best you can be through continuous improvement. Taking into account your customers needs and asking yourself what services you would pay for.
I would look to implement Lean effectively by firstly engaging with my team so that they understand what is required, the methodologies, who has the responsibility and how important they are as they have the experience and knowledge to help transform what they do.
Ensure relevant Key Performance Metrics and measures are introduced so individuals can identify what they do to our own and customer’s service levels.I would then introduce different aspects of Lean methodology based on the speed of understanding ensuring that each element has been taken on-board and working before introducing the next. Working with Team Leads, smaller staff teams and or SME’s to:
Introduce daily meetings for two way performance feedback, discuss and log issues. Map out processes to identify waste opportunities and increase efficiencies creating standard operating procedures. Gain individual/team ownership with ‘Champions’ of various activities such as CI/Waste, 5S. Ensure benefits are tracked and reported back to the team(s) Complete regular reviews to ensure tasks are being carried out correctly and performance criteria measurements are still relevant
and effective.
It is paramount that staff feel engaged and can see the benefits being derived from these processes and even how creating this capacity is used are understood. Ensuring that there is a good 2 way feedback process in place to aid this can make a huge difference in staff sustainability and future engagement.
© OEE 2013
6
Tool or Technique SubmissionPlease describe your experience in detail, focusing on the business problem, the solution you implemented and the business benefits delivered
Tool or Technique Process Mapping
Business Area and Client Contact Name* Business Performance Team - Management Information
Please describe the business problem that you encountered Duplication of effort/time due to the number of reports for R&A MI being completed that overlapped or meant data was being transferred from one report to another.Background.Over time various MI reports had been requested for seemingly one off issues or requirements but had never been closed or stopped. As such a staff member would spend 50 minutes per day updating them when no one was using some of the data.
Please describe the solution that you implemented We reviewed the current requirements for MI production for R&A and cross checked these with all of the various reports being completed on a daily basis.We found that one particular spreadsheet being completed covered the requirements and would therefore remove 2 other spreadsheets from requiring daily updates.
Please describe the business benefits that you delivered
This would reduce the overall time spent updating these reports by 30 minutes a day so releasing capacity into the team, reducing stress levels on busier days and improving morale by removing non value add tasks. There is also the reduction in risk associated with multiple hand offs where information was previously being copied and pasted.
Supporting evidence provided See attached Power Point
© OEE 2013
7
Statement of Authorship
In submitting this portfolio, I certify that the contents, and all supporting evidence, represent either:
My own work, orWork I carried out jointly with another Lean team member, who has been suitably credited in the relevant sections of this document, or
Work completed by members of a client team or department, working under my direct guidance and coaching
None of the evidence submitted represents the work of others except as described above
By making this submission I give my consent to an OEE assessor contacting other members of my team, and any of the client contacts named, to verify that the work described is my own work and was completed to the standards I have described
I understand that, should this declaration prove (now or in the future) to be untrue, the relevant part of this evidence portfolio will become invalid. Should the evidence portfolio be weakened as a result, OEE reserve the right to revoke Lean accreditation should the revised submission no longer provide a suitably strong case.
MI DuplicationMalcolm Sanders, Linford Forum Site Manager
1. Project Information:
Project Title: R&A Management Information Collation process
Project Number: Start Date: 01/06/2015
Implementation Area: Business Performance Team Project Lead: Malcolm Sanders Target Completion Date:
30/04/2016
Site: Linford Sponsor: Deane Sheppard Duration: 10 months2. Problem Statement / Opportunity:
• The purpose of this project is to eliminate NVA steps from the R&A MI reporting process and reduce the current timeframe for completion.
• Duplication of effort/time due to the number of reports for R&A MI being completed that overlapped or meant data was being transferred from one report to another.
• The combined resource time across the site is 50 mins per day.• The process is used as a performance guide of the account against the internal
outstanding caseload target although RBSG are aware and is discussed at a monthly Review of HP performance.
Measures of Success: Actual emphasis & targets to be agreed / sign off
3. Goals / Objectives:
Goal(s): Successful Implementation will mean:
• A reduction in resource time allocated to the process.• Removal of NVA steps.• Removal of potential for errors in copying and pasting data.
4. Scope / Risks / Dependencies:
Scope: R&A MI process with Business Performance TeamOut of scope: All other processes with the Business Performance teamRisk: Incorrect information could be supplied to the clientDependency: RBSG approval for their AYiC test audit.Assumption:
Approval: 1 Date 2 Date 3 Date 4
6. Project Plan-Key Milestones:
Key Milestone Planned Date
1.Team workshop – Process Mapping ‘ As – is’2.Team Workshop – Brainstorming Session3.Team workshop – Process Mapping ‘Future’ and solutions4.Staff briefing – Introduction of changes5.Team workshop – Lesson learnt and process approval
19th June 201526th June 201531st July 201531st August 201531st October 2015
7. Team and Location:
Resource 1:Malcolm Sanders – Site Manager, LinfordKim Deery – Business Performance Clerk, LinfordJohn Fox – RBS Industry and Operational Assurance Specialist, Premier Place, London
Measure Base-line Target Timeframe
Time taken to complete MI tasks 50 minutes 30 minutes 1 month
Number of Steps in process 14 8 1 month
Background
• Management Information is gathered on behalf of the Royal Bank of Scotland and internally to the Linford site in respect of Research and Adjustment volumetrics. These show the number of items per error type received, and therefore outstanding, or closed.
• This information is used to review movement in error type volumes, highlight spikes in volume received and provide a visual breakdown of outstanding cases to enable monitoring against internal targets.
• Over the years a number of one off MI requests had been actioned but not closed off and as such there is a lot of duplication of effort, data being copied and pasted from one sheet to another, wasted resource time and during peak times, stress.
• During a Gemba the issue was overheard by the Site Manager and as such a review was undertaken.
Current R&A MI Produced• MIRA On / Off report - System produced report saved to a local drive.• R&A Caseload Spreadsheet – 10 minutes per day produced but data transferred
from the On / Off report.• R&A Open / Closed report – 20 minutes per day. Data transferred from the On /
Off report.
Approach Taken
• A meeting was requested to discuss the approach review the current customer and internal requirements.
• Process mapping of the R&A Management Information tasks.• This was then used to identify duplication and NVA steps.• A revised flow was agreed upon and introduced into the team.
Process Maps of current state.
Brainstorming Changes to Process
• We demonstrated though that all of the relevant detail required as part of the audit was available in the MIRA reports that are saved and could be accessed at any point.
• Subsequently they have agreed to the change and have amended their control audit process.
Potential Solution
Cons Pros Take forward?
To remove the R&A Caseload spreadsheet.
This would require approval from the customer as they used this as part of their internal AYiC (Are You in Control) audits
Would remove 30 minutes
Yes
Get the spreadsheets to link Effort needed for this wouldn’t be well spent, as NVA info would still be being transferred
Would remove duplication of effort & time spent
No
To stop all of the logging- Does the customer need it?
Customer confirmed it was needed in some format for their testing
Would remove 50 minutes No
Can the customer not access the information directly
Customer doesn’t have access to our systems
Would remove 50 minutes No
New Process Maps
Summary of Results
Quality- Reduced risk of error as information isn’t being copied
from one sheet to another.The new process still conforms
with the customers Audit system
Cost- Savings of 30 minutes daily within the team which is
reinvested in training and Ci activity
Delivery- The time saving has meant that the information is in it’s completed form 30 minutes
earlier
Safety not affected
Morale: less frustration & pressure at peak times due to NVA
activity being removed
Lessons learnt
• There is still work to be done in ensuring that staff feel empowered to actively stop and assess what they do.
• That GEMBA is an extremely useful tool in which to keep abreast of how teams and individuals are feeling & where there might be opportunity for improvement
• You can change the customers requirements by highlighting NVA activity.