ng bb 38 analyze tollgate
Post on 21-Jan-2015
1.128 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Black Belt Analyze
Tollgate Briefing
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
Project NameDEPMS Project Number
Name of Belt
OrganizationDate
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
2
Tollgate Requirements - Analyze
PROJECT DELIVERABLES NGB COMMENTS
ANALYZE
Root Cause Validation / Identification Mandatory Required for all projects
Cause & Effect Analysis (Fishbone) Mandatory Identify all potential Xs
Cause & Effect (XY) Matrix Mandatory Determine critical Xs
Failure Modes & Effects Analysis Mandatory Analyze risk
Hypothesis Testing / Regression/ ANOVA Optional Varies by project
Process Constraint ID Optional Varies by project
Takt Rate / Time Study Optional Varies by project
Pareto Charts Optional Varies by project
Sampling Plan / Analysis Optional Varies by project
Storyboard / A3 Mandatory 1-page proj summary
Barriers/Issues/Risks Mandatory
Quick Wins Recommended
Lessons Learned Optional
NG CPI BLACK BELT TOLLGATE REQUIREMENTS
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
3
NOTE: THIS IS A TEMPLATE FOR ALL NG CPI BELTS
NG has developed this template as a basic format with standard deliverables to
help guide NG CPI belts through the NG tollgate requirements for certification.
It is recognized that each project is unique and has unique deliverables with
unique flows. Therefore, this format does not have to be followed exactly to the
letter of the law for your project.
(DELETE THIS SLIDE FOR YOUR PROJECT)
Analyze Tollgate Templates
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
4
Project CharterProblem Statement:
Business Case:
Goal Statement:
Unit:
Defect:
Customer Specifications:
Process Start:
Process Stop:
Scope:
Project TimelinePhase Start Stop Status
Define mm/dd/yy mm/dd/yy
Measure mm/dd/yy mm/dd/yy
Analyze mm/dd/yy mm/dd/yy
Improve mm/dd/yy mm/dd/yy
Control mm/dd/yy mm/dd/yy
Take away
message goes
here
(impact of
problem)
Team Members
Name Role Affiliation DACI
Black Belt Driver
Master Black Belt Driver
Project Sponsor Approver
Process Owner Approver
Required Deliverable
Define Charter and Timeline
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
5
Measure Overview
VOC / VOB
Unit (d) or Mean (c)
Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c)
DPMO (d)
PCE: (Cycle Time Only)
PLT: (Cycle Time Only)
Sigma Quality Level
MSA Results: show the percentage result of the GR&R or other measurement systems analysis carried out in the project
Baseline Statistics
Tools Used
Process Capability
Baseline “As Is” Performance
Detailed process mapping
Measurement Systems Analysis
Value Stream Mapping
Data Collection Planning
Basic Statistics
Process Capability
Histograms
Time Series Plot
Probability Plot
Pareto Analysis
Operational Definitions
5s
Generic Pull
Control Charts
343230282624
Median
Mean
29.429.329.229.129.028.928.8
A nderson-Darling Normality Test
V ariance 7.169
Skewness 0.201075
Kurtosis -0.471714
N 266
Minimum 24.000
A -Squared
1st Q uartile 27.000
Median 29.000
3rd Q uartile 31.000
Maximum 35.000
95% C onfidence Interv al for Mean
28.805
1.95
29.451
95% C onfidence Interv al for Median
29.000 29.000
95% C onfidence Interv al for StDev
2.468 2.927
P-V alue < 0.005
Mean 29.128
StDev 2.677
95% Confidence Intervals
Summary for Delivery Time
36322824201612
LSL Target USL
Process Data
Sample N 266
StDev (Within) 2.87033
StDev (O v erall) 2.69154
LSL 10
Target 20
USL 30
Sample Mean 29.1203
Potential (Within) C apability
C C pk 1.16
O v erall C apability
Pp 1.24
PPL 2.37
PPU 0.11
Ppk
C p
0.11
C pm 0.35
1.16
C PL 2.22
C PU 0.10
C pk 0.10
O bserv ed Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 281954.89
PPM Total 281954.89
Exp. Within Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 379619.67
PPM Total 379619.67
Exp. O v erall Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 371895.18
PPM Total 371895.18
Within
Overall
Process Capability of Delivery Time
- Example -
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
6
Process Constraint ID Analysis
Takt Rate Analysis compares the task time of each process (or process step) to other steps and customer demand to determine if the time trap is the constraint
Value Add Analysis - Current State
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Task #
Task T
ime (
seco
nd
s)
CVA Time NVA-R Time NVA Time
Takt Time = 55
Takt Rate = Customer Demand Rate =Net Process Time AvailableNumber of Units to Process
Takt Time = Number of Units to ProcessNet Process Time Available
- Example -
BB Optional Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
7
SouthNorth
EastOthers
100 50 15 6
58.5 29.2 8.8 3.5
58.5 87.7 96.5 100.0
0
50
100
150
0
20
40
60
80
100
Defect
CountPercentCum %
Perc
ent
Count
Pareto Chart
Pareto Plot Analysis
The South and North contain over 80% of the defects. Our
project will focus here and not on the East and West.
- Example -
Optional Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
8
Cause & Effect Diagram (Fishbone)
Lack of Seats
Lack of Funds
Delays in elevating
Impasse issues
(Type of Space)
(Y) Effect:
PLT = 5 days
(too long)
Facilities & EquipmentManpower
Mother Nature
Unforeseen
Circumstances
Materials
Methods Measurements
No Standardization of seats
Getting Seats Takes Time
Lack of Controls
Lack of Controls
Multiple Paths
Inequality in seats
PeopleFacilities
Lack of Database
Collocation
Unplanned Programs
Senior Leadership
Mold, HVAC Crashes
Competency vs. PMA
CAO/IPT
Too Long (Time)
Lack of Knowledge
“Dedicated” to Task
Approvals
New Codes
Old Buildings
Wrong Location
Not Suited for
Current Mission
Space
No Suitable space to Assign
Time Avail to
Wait
Vague
Reqmts
Funding Decision
(Competing forSame Space)
Location
Senior Leader
Required Deliverable
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
9
XY Matrix (Root Cause Analysis)
Rating of
Importance to
Customer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Requ
ireme
nt
Total
Process Step Process Input
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 0
10 0
11 0
12 0
13 0
14 0
15 0
16 0
17 0
18 0
19 0
20 0
0
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lower Spec
Target
Upper Spec
This table provides the initial input to the FMEA. When each of the output variables
(requirements) are not correct, that represents potential "EFFECTS". When each input
variable is not correct, that represents "Failure Modes".
1. List the Key Process Output Variables
2. Rate each variable on a 1-to-10 scale to importantance to the customer
3. List Key Process Input Variables
4. Rate each variables relationship to each output variable on a 1-to-10 scale
5. Select the top input variables to start the FMEA process; Determine how each selected
input varable can "go wrong" and place that in the Failure Mode column of the FMEA.
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
10
Process or
Product Name:Prepared by:
Pag
e
____
Responsible: FMEA Date (Orig) ______________ (Rev) _____________
Process
Step / Input
Potential Failure
Mode
Potential Failure
EffectsPotential Causes Current Controls
What is the
process
step and
Input under
investiga-
tion?
In what ways does
the Key Input go
wrong?
What is the impact
on the Key Output
Variables (Customer
Requirements)?
What causes the Key
Input to go wrong?
What are the existing
controls and procedures
(inspection and test) that
prevent either the cause
or the Failure Mode?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
E
V
E
R
I
T
Y
O
C
C
U
R
R
E
N
C
E
D
E
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
RP
N
Process/Product
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis Form
(FMEA)
Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA)
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
11
Hypothesis Test Summary
Hypothesis Test (ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t - test, Chi Squared,
Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc)
Factor (x)
Testedp Value Observations/Conclusion
Example: ANOVA Location 0.030
Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC
to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to
generally be longer for the Baltimore site
Example: ANOVA Part vs. No Part 0.004
Significant factor - on average, calls requiring
parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43
hours)
Example: Chi Squared Department 0.000
Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized
addition of customer info to ticket and less
human intervention, resulting in fewer errors
Example: Pareto Region n/a
South region accounted for 59% of the defects
due to their manual process and distance from
the parts warehouse
Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data
Optional BB Deliverable- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
12
No P
art
Part
0
50
100
150
Part/No Part
Net H
ours
Call
Open
Boxplots of Net Hour by Part/No
(means are indicated by solid circles)
Analysis of Variance for Net Hour
Source DF SS MS F P
Part/No 1 7421 7421 8.65 0.004
Error 69 59194 858
Total 70 66615
Individual 95% CI's For Mean
Level N Mean StDev --+---------+---------+---------+----
No Part 27 21.99 19.95 (--------*---------)
Part 44 43.05 33.70 (------*------)
--+---------+---------+---------+----
Pooled StDev = 29.29 12 24 36 48
After further investigation, possible reasons proposed by the team are OEM backorders, lack of technician certifications and the distance from the OEM to the client site. It is also caused by the need for technicians to make a second visit to the end user to complete the part replacement. Next step will be for the team to confirm these suspected root causes.
Boxplot: Part/ No Part Impact on Ticket Cycle Time
Because the p-value <= 0.05, we can be confident that calls requiring parts do have an impact on the ticket cycle time.
One-Way ANOVA: Root Cause Verification
Optional BB Deliverable
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
13
Linear Regression
95% confident that 94.1% of the variation in “Wait Time” is from the “Qty of Deliveries”
Deliveries
Wa
it T
ime
353025201510
55
50
45
40
35
S 1.11885
R-Sq 94.1%
R-Sq(adj) 93.9%
Fitted Line PlotWait Time = 32.05 + 0.5825 Deliveries
Optional BB Deliverable
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
14
Project Barriers/Issues/Risks
Barriers
Issues
Risks
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
15
DMAIC Analyze StoryboardDefine
MeasureAnalyze
Sigma Performance Level of
1.3
Officer Work & Turnover, Waiting, & AutomationAffect CT; Job Aids affect Variation in CT
BUS CASE: Be #2 Fin Service Provider
GOAL: Reduce Loan/Lease CT from9.2 to 8.0 days by July 1
FIN IMPACT: $2.7M per year
Project Charter1.2 Day CCR Gap
- Example -
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
16
Company: Department: Date: Prepared by:
1. Define the problem situation
2. Problem Analysis
3. Action plans to correct problems
4. Results of Activity
5. Future Steps
8-Step A3 Project Summary Report
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
17
NG CPI Tollgate Tool
Control Charts Process Capability
Process Capability High Level Process Map (SIPOC)
(Finance Owner)(Finance Owner)
(MBB)(MBB)(MBB)(MBB)(MBB)
(Sponsor)(Sponsor)(Sponsor)(Sponsor)(Sponsor)
I accept the ControlTollgate
I accept the Improve Tollgate
I accept the Analyze Tollgate
I accept the MeasureTollgate
I accept the Define Tollgate
(Process Owner)(Process Owner)(Process Owner)(Process Owner)(Process Owner)
Project Charter• Problem Stmt• Defect Definition• Goal Statement• Project Scope• Business Impact• Strat Alignment
Detailed As Is Process Map
Value Stream Map Key Process Metrics
Potential Xs• Brainstorming• 5 Whys • Fishbone • Affinity Diagram
“To Be” Process Map
Solution Generation / Prioritization
Process Control Plan
Process Owner Accountability
Sponsor & Team
Replication Check
Data Collection Plan
Measure Systems
Analysis
Data Collected
Critical Xs • Cause & Effect Matrix• Hypothesis Testing• Regression• Time Studies• Theory of Constraints
Improvement Strategy• Improvement Model• Implementation Plan• Pilot • “X” Improvement Target
Updated Financial Benefits
Replication Opportunities
Measurable Y
Voice of Customer
Customer Specs
Voice of Business
Baseline Data Analysis
• Descriptive Stats
• Graphs
• Pareto Charts
FMEA• Risk Analysis • Risk Mitigation Plan
Mistake Proofing Project Documentation of revised policies, SOP’s, procedures, and training
Project Timeline
Communication Plan• Stakeholder Analysis
Est Financial Benefits
Control Charts (as needed)
FMEA• Risk Analysis • Risk Mitigation Plan
Visual Process Control Tools (Optional)
1. ValidateProblem
4. Find Root Cause
3. Set Targets
5. Develop C-Ms
6. See C-Ms Through
2. IdentifyGaps
7. Confirm Results
8. Standardize
Define Measure Analyze ControlImprove
8-STEP PROCESS
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
18
Appendix
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
19
Team MembersName Role Affiliation DACI
Black Belt Driver
Master Black Belt Driver
Project Sponsor Approver
Process Owner Approver
Contributor
Contributor
Contributor
Contributor
Inform
Inform
Inform
Inform
Required Deliverable
Cross Functional Team
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
20
I confirm that:
DEPMS (DoD Enterprise Performance Management System) has been searched for similar projects: Yes / No
Replication: List relevant initiatives / potential replication projects found (if any):
• Project 1: (DEPMS # or other tracking tool project number)
• Project 2:
Collaboration: Identify organizations that can/should be considered for working this project collaboratively:
• Organization 1:
• Organization 2:Required Deliverable
Replication Check
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
21
Strategic Alignment
The Define Tollgate requires a linkage to organizational strategy.
Include an organizational metric/metrics for which your project will help improve
Refer to your organization’s Strategic Plan and/or other referenced documents
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
22
Business Impact
Insert as much information as possible about the potential operational and/or financial benefits
Include any assumptions upon which these estimates are based
Example: Operational benefits – This project is expected to reduce PLT by 35%, improve SQL from 1.2 to 3.0, save 20 man hours per shift
Example: Financial benefits – This project is expected to save $xx in FYxx
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
23
Measurable Y:
Required Deliverable
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers
High-Level Process Map (SIPOC)
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
24
Voice of the Customer /
Key Customer Issue(s)Critical Customer
Requirement
What does the customer want from us? What does the customer want from us? We need to identify the issue(s) that
prevent us from satisfying our customers.
We should summarize key issues and translate them into specific and measurable
requirements
Required Deliverable
Voice of Customer / Voice of Business
Voice of the Business
Key Process Issue(s)CriticalBusiness
Requirement
What does the business want/need from us? What does the business want/need from us? We need to identify the issue(s) that prevent us from meeting strategic
goals/missions.
We should summarize key issues and translate them into specific and measurable
requirements
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
25
Stakeholder
Name/Group
Project Impact
On Stakeholder
(H, M, L)
Stakeholder
Level of
Influence on
Success of
Project (H,M,L)
Stakeholder’s
Current Attitude
Toward Project
( +, 0, - )
Explanation of
Current
Stakeholder
Attitude
(list)
Stakeholder
Score
(H=3, M=2, L=1,
+=3, 0=1, -=-3)
Action Plan
For
Stakeholder
Recommended Deliverable
Stakeholder Analysis
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
26
Audience Media PurposeTopics of
Discussion/
Key MessagesOwner Frequency Notes/Status
Communication Plan
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
27
- Example -
Detailed “As Is” Process Map
Required Deliverable - VSM or Process Map or Both
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
28
Order Mgmt Supervisor
CUSTOMER
DISTOrder MgmtOrder MgmtOrder Mgmt Order Mgmt
Screen for Acct Mgr
Order Mgmt
P/T = 2 min
Error Rate=2%
Volume=800
P/T = 6 Min
Error Rate=0%
Volume=800
P/T = 6 Min
Error Rate=2%
Volume=800
P/T = 2 Min
Error Rate=1%
Volume=800
20 Orders
3 min
Phone Call
Large
Business
Home
6 Customers
5 Customers
3 Customers
Small
Business
Customer
Info4
Product
Need4Pricing
4
Shipping
Info4
P/T = 3 min
Lost calls=10%
Volume=1200
Pick
Pack & Ship
P/T = 120 Min
Error Rate=1%
Volume=1200
10
2 min 6 min 6 min 2 min 120 min
240 min5 min
Customer call time = 24 min
Service lead time = 384 min
SUPPLIERSManual Update
Weekly Update
Phone Call
Trigger:
Completion Criteria:
Cycle Time:
Takt Time:
Number of People:
Number of Approvals:
Items in Inbox:
% Rework:
# of Iterations (cycles):
# of Databases:
Top 3 Rework Issues:
1.
2.
3.
- Example -
Required Deliverable - VSM or Process Map or Both
Value Stream Map
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
29
Key Input, Process, and Output Metrics
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customer
Start
Step1Step 2 Step 3
Step 4Step 5
Input Metrics Process Metrics Output Metrics
Quality
Speed
Cost
VOC/
VOB
Required Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
30
Operational Definitions
Define each of the Key Input, Output, Process Metrics from your SIPOC that you are going to collect data on (via the Data Collection Plan) as well as any other terms that need clarification for the data collectors and everyone else on the team.
Examples:
Award Process PLT: The time from when a Director submits the Award recommendation to the time when the employee is presented the Award in a ceremony.
Number of Claims Processed: The number of Claims processed per weekday (M-F).
Total Hours Worked: The total number of hours worked in the facility including weekends and holidays.
Number of Personnel: The total number of military and civilian personnel working (not including contractors).
Include other unique terms that apply to your project that require clear operational definitions for those collecting the data and for those interpreting the data.
Required
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
31
Data Collection PlanPerformance Measure
Operational Definition
Data Source and
Location
How Will Data Be Collected
Who Will Collect Data
When Will Data Be
Collected
Sample Size
Stratification Factors
How will data be used?
Ability to update projects and build tollgate reviews
X1
– Steps to update projects
In DEPMS By counting steps Name ASAP 1 None To find VA, BNVA, NVA
Ability to update projects and build tollgate reviews
X2
– Tollgate template slides that match POI
In DEPMS By determining % of activity steps identified in “Introduction to _____” modules in POI that are adequately addressed in templates
Name ASAP 40 None To determine consistency with POI
Easy Access to LSS tools and references
X3 – Availability of
LSS tools and references
In DEPMS By determining the percentage of tools, with their references, listed on DMAIC Road Map slides that can be found in PS
Name ASAP 63 None To determine availability of tools and references
Easy Access to LSS tools and references
X4
– Steps required to find tools and references
In DEPMS By counting # steps required to find the tools and their references
Name ASAP 37 None To find VA, BNVA, NVA
Required Deliverable
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
32
Measurement Systems AnalysisThe Measurement System used to collect data has been calibrated and is considered to have no potential for significant errors. The data collection tool is reliable, can be counted on, has good resolution, shows no signs of bias and is stable.
Type of Measurement
ErrorDescription Considerations to this Project
Discrimination (resolution)
The ability of the measurement system to divide measurements into “data categories”
Work hours can be measured to <.25 hours. Radar usage measure to +- 2 minute.
BiasThe difference between an observed average measurement result and a reference value
No bias - Work hours and radar start-stop times consistent through population.
Stability The change in bias over timeNo bias of work hours and radar usage data.
Repeatability The extent variability is consistentNot an issue. Labor and radar usage is historical and felt to be accurate enough for insight and analysis.
ReproducibilityDifferent appraisers produce consistent results
Remarks in usage data deemed not reproducible, therefore were not considered in determining which radars were used in each op
Variation The difference between parts N/a to this process.Required Deliverable
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
33
Measurement Systems Analysis
The Measurement System is acceptable with the Total Gage R&R % Contribution <10%
Percent
Part-to-PartReprodRepeatGage R&R
100
50
0
% Contribution
% Study Var
Sam
ple
Range 0.10
0.05
0.00
_R=0.0417
UCL=0.1073
LCL=0
1 2 3
Sam
ple
Mean
10.00
9.75
9.50
__X=9.7996
UCL=9.8422
LCL=9.7569
1 2 3
Part
10987654321
10.00
9.75
9.50
Operator
321
10.00
9.75
9.50
Part
Average
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
10.00
9.75
9.50
Operator
1
2
3
Gage name:
Date of study :
Reported by :
Tolerance:
Misc:
Components of Variation
R Chart by Operator
Xbar Chart by Operator
Response by Part
Response by Operator
Operator * Part Interaction
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for ResponseGage R&R
%Contribution
Source VarComp (of VarComp)
Total Gage R&R 0.0015896 3.70
Repeatability 0.0005567 1.29
Reproducibility 0.0010330 2.40
Operator 0.0003418 0.79
Operator*Part 0.0006912 1.61
Part-To-Part 0.0414247 96.30
Total Variation 0.0430143 100.00
Study Var %Study Var
Source StdDev (SD) (6 * SD) (%SV)
Total Gage R&R 0.039870 0.23922 19.22
Repeatability 0.023594 0.14156 11.38
Reproducibility 0.032140 0.19284 15.50
Operator 0.018488 0.11093 8.91
Operator*Part 0.026290 0.15774 12.68
Part-To-Part 0.203531 1.22118 98.13
Total Variation 0.207399 1.24439 100.00
Number of Distinct Categories = 7
- Example -Optional BB Deliverable
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
34
“As Is” Baseline Statistics
The current process has a non-normal distribution with the P-Value < 0.05
Mean = 44 days
Median = 22 days
Std Dev = 61 days
Range = 365 days
Required Deliverable
360300240180120600
Median
Mean
6050403020
1st Q uartile 12.000
Median 22.000
3rd Q uartile 52.000
Maximum 365.000
33.647 55.981
17.000 29.123
54.308 70.246
A -Squared 12.65
P-V alue < 0.005
Mean 44.814
StDev 61.251
V ariance 3751.674
Skewness 2.87329
Kurtosis 9.54577
N 118
Minimum 1.000
A nderson-Darling Normality Test
95% C onfidence Interv al for Mean
95% C onfidence Interv al for Median
95% C onfidence Interv al for StDev95% Confidence Intervals
Summary for Workdays
- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
35
Process Control Chart
The current baseline delivery time is stable over time with both the Moving Range (3.22 days) and Individual Average (29.13 days) experiencing common cause variation
255 data points collected with zero subgroups, thus the I&MR control chart selected
Observation
In
div
idu
al
Va
lue
2442171901631361098255281
40
35
30
25
20
_X=29.13
UC L=37.70
LC L=20.56
Observation
Mo
vin
g R
an
ge
2442171901631361098255281
10.0
7.5
5.0
2.5
0.0
__MR=3.22
UC L=10.53
LC L=0
I-MR Chart of Delivery Time
Required As Applicable- Example -
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO
36
118 data points collected
Non-normal distribution
Mean = 44 days
Lower Cust Spec = 0 days
Upper Cust Spec = 15 days
65% of observations outside customer spec
Z Bench = -.31
Required Deliverable
- Example -
Process Capability
420360300240180120600
LSLUSL
LSL 0
Target *
USL 15
Sample Mean 44.8136
Sample N 118
Location 3.09501
Scale 1.26378
Process Data
Z.Bench -0.31
Z.LSL 3.07
Z.USL -0.02
Ppk -0.01
O v erall C apability
% < LSL 0.00
% > USL 65.25
% Total 65.25
O bserv ed Performance
% < LSL 0.00
% > USL 62.03
% Total 62.03
Exp. O v erall Performance
Process Capability of WorkdaysCalculations Based on Lognormal Distribution Model
top related