Paper Organizers International: A Fictitious Six Sigma Green Belt Case Study
- Background of the Case Study
- Define Phase
- Measure Phase
- Analyze Phase
- Improve Phase
- Control Phase
- References
CHAPTER OUTLINE
16.1 Background of the Case Study
16.2 Define Phase
16.3 Measure Phase
16.4 Analyze Phase
16.5 Improve Phase
16.6 Control Phase
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After reading this chapter, you will be able to:
Conduct a Six SigmaDMAIC项目
Use the tools and methods of the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control Phases
16.1 Background of the Case Study
The Company
Paper Organizers International (POI) offers a full range of filing, organizing, and paper shuffling services. To accomplish these tasks,POIpurchases metallic securing devices[*](MSDs), staplers, hole punchers, folders, three-ring binders, and a full range of related products to serve its customers' paper-handling needs. The employees, or internal customers, of Paper Organizers International use Metallic Securing Devices (MSDs) to organize piles of paper pending placement into folders or binders.
The Purchasing Department ofPOI注意到一个increase in complaints from employees in the Paper-Shuffling Department (PSD) about MSDs breaking and failing to keep papers together. This creates opportunities for client papers to be mixed together. The Purchasing Department would like to improve the process for purchasing MSDs to eliminate complaints from employees in the Paper Shuffling Department.
Origin of theMSDSix Sigma Project
POI's mission statement is "Put theRightInformation in the RightPlace,"RIPit! To accomplish this mission,POIhas established a cascading set of business objectives and business indicators, which ultimately result in potential Six Sigma projects, see Table 16.1 on page 491.
Table 16.1. POI's Business Objectives and Indicators with Potential Six Sigma Projects
President |
Director of Paper Shuffling Department (PSD) |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Business objectives |
Business indicators |
Area objectives |
Area indicators |
Potential Six Sigma projects |
Increase the number of orders |
Number of orders/month(c-chart) |
Increase the number of orders inPSD |
Number of orders inPSD/month(c-chart) |
New customer promotions project |
Increase the number ofPOIservices (filing, organizing, etc.) utilized by each customer |
Average/and standard deviation of number of services utilized per customer/quarter(and S-charts) |
Increase the number of services utilized by each customer inPSD |
Average and standard deviation of number of services utilized perPSDcustomer/quarter(and S-charts) |
Existing customer promotions project |
Minimize production costs |
Production costs/month(I and MR charts) |
Minimize production costs inPSD |
的生产成本PSD/month(Figure 16.1; I and MR charts) |
MSDquality project |
Eliminate employee complaints |
Number of employee complaints/month(c-chart) |
Eliminate employee complaints fromPSD |
Number of employee complaints fromPSD/month(c-chart) |
Employee morale project |
The monthly production costs in thePSDare shown on the Individual and Moving Range chart inFigure 16.1(see the next to last row in the fourth column in Table 16.1).
Figure 16.1Minitab Individual and Moving Range Chart of Monthly Production Costs in the PSD
Figure 16.1on page492indicates that production costs are stable (no special causes such as points beyond a control limit or too many sequences up and down, etc.) in thePSDwith an average monthly cost of $1,096,880.00 and a standard deviation of $99,000 (/d2 =$111,672/1.128).Additionally, production costs are approximately normally distributed (seeFigure 16.2on page492). Team members discovered thatPSDmanagement considers monthly production costs to be very high, given the volume of work being processed by the department.
Figure 16.2Minitab Histogram of Monthly Production Costs in the PSD
The four potential Six Sigma projects shown in the rightmost column of Table 16.1 are prioritized for attention in Table 16.2. Table 16.2 on page 493 is a Cause-and-Effect-type matrix (see Section 4.1) that weights the importance of each potential Six Sigma project to each of POI's business objectives.
Table 16.2. Prioritization of Potential Six Sigma Projects
Business objectives |
Potential Six Sigma projects |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New customer promotions project |
Existing customer promotions project |
MSDquality project |
Employee morale project |
|||
Increase the number of orders |
Weights |
.35 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
Increase the number ofPOIservices utilized by each customer |
.10 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
|
Minimize production costs |
.40 |
0 |
0 |
9 |
3 |
|
Eliminate employee complaints |
.15 |
0 |
0 |
9 |
9 |
|
Weighted average of potential Six Sigma projects |
1.15 |
1.35 |
4.95[*] |
2.55 |
细胞值由高层管理和分配are defined as follows: 0 = no relationship, 1 = weak relationship, 3 = moderate relationship, and 9 = strong relationship. The Finance Department developed the importance weights for each business objective to maximize the impact of Six Sigma projects on the bottom line of the organization. Consequently, the most critical project with respect to the business objectives is theMSDquality project; see 4.95 in the last row of Table 16.2. The champion and process owner of theMSDprocess prepared an initial project charter and presented it to the members of theMSDquality project team.