Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Lean_Six_Sigma_Textbook_Process_Project_Final_Presentation
Process Outcome Variable:
Cause and Effect Diagram
Thank you, Lean Six Sigma!
Current state Post Approval/Re-approval sub process
Top Five Causes from Multi-Voting of 9 core team members
1. Too many handoffs/people involved in process
Law of diminishing returns (9 votes)
2. Separate tools (lists) don’t integrate (8 votes)
3. Too many alternate texts – no standards
– no up front commitment (7 votes)
4. Duplication of efforts (6 votes)
5. Lack of accountability or consequences (4 votes)
Mean Total Actual Time 8.1 hours per person
Mean Total Cycle Time 116.2 hours per person
The Spring 2013 ATL contains 3221 line items and is 241 pages
(84% are official texts)
Surveys/Data from Winter 2013
Survey 440 Faculty, Deans, Directors involved in textbook process
Voice of the Customer Survey - Bookstore Managers
How satisfied are you with the current textbook ordering process?
I can order books confidently.
Add bookstore hours current
Add Port Huron hours current
A New and Improved Textbook Process, and $$$ Saved
Reduce waste (Lean):
Decrease number of hand-offs
Approve once and move on!
Increase accuracy (Six Sigma):
Clean Up Approved Textbook List
Goal: One course, One text (UbD)
Consensus Decision - Standardize across campuses
Force Field Analysis
Cause and Effect Matrix
Port Huron Pilot-Highlights
•Program Champions prepared potential textbook changes and recommendations prior to Week 2 System Program Workshops
•Port Huron Bookstore Manager prepared “good list”
•Textbook Change Form provided to Program Champions
•Bookstore and System representatives available at Week 2 Workshops to make changes to ATL and check availability of texts
•Consensus decision Week 2 Quarterly Workshops
•Sign-off on curriculum by the respective program’s System Director
•This pilot process eliminated hand-offs and re-approvals on PH campus
•Total number of textbook change requests for PH Spring 2013: 3
Measuring the Effectiveness of Our Solution
Survey customers (Bookstore) :
How much time was saved compared to previous?
Cycle time saved: 193 hours (57% less)
Actual time saved: 21 hours (73% less)
Lack of Accountability
•Why: "Academic freedom"
•Why: No process in place
•Why: No feedback or measurement regarding deviations
Duplication of Efforts
•Why: Multi-Campus structure
•Why: Each campus has developed own process
•Why: No standardized process
has not been documented or enforced
Too Many Hand offs
•Why: We don't Trust the List
•Why: The List is inaccurate
•Why: Too much choice
•Why: No standard expectations
•Why: No documented or consistent
In Spring - Fall 2012, 12% of PH texts ordered did not reflect what was assigned on the ATL (Fall 21/204) (Summer 10/102) (Spring 38/280)
Data - Histograms & Capability
If we assign a USL of 4 hours and LSL of 0 hours, the Cp-0.16 & Cr=6 Unilateral Tolerance - Process fails to meet minimum requirements
Mean 8.1 hours per person
Standard Deviation 7.6 hours per person
Mean 116.2 hours per person
Standard Deviation 174.3 hours per person
Duplicate efforts and excessive personnel hours in the current textbook process (from approval to ordering) result in substantial costs incurred by the College. A survey of program champions who order texts reflected a quarterly mean total actual time of 8.1 hours per person and a mean total cycle time of 116.2 hours per person.
Federal regulations mandate that all post secondary institutions provide textbook information to students at the time of registration.
From 2011 to 2013, bookstore managers have not had a consistent application of the ATL (Approved Textbook List) that reflects system-approved selections. For example, 12 percent of textbooks ordered by the Port Huron campus for fall 2012 differed from the textbooks listed on the ATL. Bookstores on all campuses are unable to effectively and efficiently order from the current list.
Voice of the Customer
Dr. Karen Bratus
Kevin Kijewski, Esq.
Dr. Maureen Steen
Dr. Sandy Valensky
Louise Wang-Weldon, Esq.
Mentors: Dr. Julia Teahen
& Jeff Chapko
Champion: Dr. Denise Bannan
Textbook Process Project
Baker College Guiding Principles
Continuous Quality Improvement
Port Huron Campus Focus Group Feedback
Need uniform communication from System
All focus group participants acknowledged that the previous process needed improvement
Every campus used a different process - lack of consistency
Need for uniformity and accountability
Many pain points associated with previous process
Many respondents indicated there were issues with redundancy in the previous process. For instance, one respondent commented "We do the same thing seven times"
Pilot process was effective. Respondents agreed that new process should be rolled out system-wide
Control Chart Port Huron (after)
Reduce (or eliminate) Workarounds at the campus level
Six Sigma -->
Training at System Program Workshops
System Directors, Bookstore Managers, and Deans will meet over the summer of 2013
System Directors must approve textbook changes on New Textbook Form
Bookstores will record deviations
(Review Bookstore Reports, Enforce Deadlines)
(Support Process Chairs)
Process Management Team
Cause and Effect
Impact of the Solution
Maintain a "Good List"
Consensus Textbook Selection
Define Phase Lessons Learned
Measure Phase Lessons Learned
Narrowing the scope of the project is a must
Shifting the scope is a natural thing
Clearly state what is out of scope
Issues with “defining”
Ending Solutions are not anticipated, so stay away from the “s-word”
Allow team to talk about the pains
The Business Case and Problem Statement will change if data does not already exist
Set meetings on calendars right at the beginning
What in the world is “cycle time???”
What exactly are we measuring?
Don’t plan too many surveys
Vovici cannot take inputs of numbers larger than 500
Who your customer is may change depending on what you are measuring
No simple way to gather data regarding number of deviations, time consuming
Analyze Phase Lessons Learned
Visual impact of tools
Do not spend time on those things that are out of your control
Don’t name process owner(s) right away, this may change
Process owner(s) should be positions, not people
You may have existing resources which are not being utilized (i.e. New Textbook Form).
Improve Phase Lessons Learned
Plan to conduct a Focus Group session
Prepare for resistance
Bookstore “eyes” opened to Academic processes
Cost savings helps support continuation of this project
A better tool is not always the solution to a process
Control Phase Lessons Learned
Need to think about Process Owner(s) and their role
Timeline—are you bound by outside time factors?
Big Lessons Learned
Communication is key
Use the appropriate tools when necessary and at the right time
Every little bit helps (don’t plan on changing the world at once)
Learning how to use LSS is a process
Maintaining this new process is going to save Baker a lot of $$$
Everything will come full circle
Our Core team was awesome!
Survey participants (Port Huron Pilot):
How much time was saved compared to last quarter?
Cycle time saved: 193 hours (86% less)
Actual time saved: 1.6 hours (30% less)
Reviewed accuracy of ATL to what was ordered:
How many deviations?
Total deviations: 3 (87% less)