1

Stryker Global Technology Center (SGTC) A subsidiary of Stryker Corporation, USA

Quality First Forum

SATEA 2016

March 10, 2017 2

What creates Quality?

2

March 10, 2017 3

What creates Quality?

Quality is created through the mindset of every last person in the company, from the CEO to the

last operator in a mfg. line

Make the jump to Quality

Go beyond the traditional

Support a true quality culture

Tools don’t matter as much as the mindset of the person

yielding them

Section 1.

Project & Team Selection

March 10, 2017 4

3

March 10, 2017 5

1.1.1

1. Who was responsible for selecting the project? P

roje

ct S

po

nso

r • SGTC leadership team was responsible for identifying the KPIs.

• Ashutosh Mittal (Director – Requlatory Affairs & Quality Assurance) was responsible to develop the core team.

Co

re T

eam

• A cross functional core team was formed comprising - • Quality Engineering • Regulatory Affairs • Research and

Development • Human Resources

Sele

ctio

n o

f P

roje

ct

• Inputs were taken from customer feedback, customer experiances and internal quality audits.

• The team used PQCDM approach for prioritization of the project.

6

2. What background information on the company or those who selected the project was provided to better understand the context of the project?

1.1.1

Facilities Systems Products

Design Control

Divisional QMS

SGTC office: GURGAON,

Haryana, India

Test Lab: MANESAR,

Haryana, India

Stryker Global Technology Center (SGTC), India is a 100% subsidiary of Stryker Corporation USA, involved in Design and development of Medical Devices.

4

2. What background information on the company or those who selected the project was provided to better understand the context of the project?

1.1.1

The service based working model of SGTC working model, customer satisfaction and word of mouth is

essential for growth

To keep a track of performance, we have a feedback loop. As the number of projects increased, the feedback data from from multiple projects was analyzed.

Reduces the company’s margin for error

Reduces cycle time

Increases output demands

Increases strain on employees

Increases chances of error 7

March 10, 2017 8

1. How was the gap or opportunity brought to the attention of the project identification group?

1.2.1

Core Team, SGTC leadership team, People Managers Who

Weekly Team Meeting How

Brainstorming and 1:1 sessions were done with the core team and leadership team

Low employee

morale

Gaps in internal quality audits

Poor Customer Feedback

5

March 10, 2017 9

2. What was the opportunity (process improvement)?

1.2.1

S.No Opportunity/Project

1. To identify the non value adding activities through lean six sigma

2. To develop a quality culture in the organization

3. To improve the productivity through 8D approach of problem solving

4. To increase the internal audit frequency and develop new auditors pools for quality audits.

Area Identified

March 10, 2017 10

3. What area of the organization had the gap or opportunity?

1.2.1

Research and Development

Information Security

Commercial Functions

Support/Admin functions

6

March 10, 2017 11

1. What data was generated to help select the project?

1.2.2

Brainstorming

Productivity

Cost

Quality Delivery

Morale

March 10, 2017 12

2. What methods and/or tools were used to assess or prioritize the need for the project?

1.2.2

S.No Opportunity/Project P Q C D M Sum

1. To identify the non value adding activities through lean six sigma

3 3 3 3 2 14

2. To develop a quality culture in the organization

4 5 5 4 5 23

3. To improve the productivity through 8D approach of problem solving

4 3 5 2 1 15

4. To increase the internal audit frequency and develop new auditors pools for quality audits.

2 4 1 2 2 11

• Building a Quality Culture in the organization

Project Identified

7

March 10, 2017 13

3. Why were these methods and/or tools used to select the project?

1.2.2

Since the problem identified is subjective and to be addressed though a strong culture of quality in the organization. We did ‘Brainstorming’ session within the core team and SGTC Leadership team. Team gives scoring on the impact of the project on following – Productivity

• How this project will help in improving productivity ?

Quality

• How the project will impact the quality culture in the organization ?

Cost

• Does the successful project completion has an impact in cost saving ?

Delivery

• Can the project help in improving the ‘deliverables on-time’?

Morale

• Does this project will help in improving employee morale ?

March 10, 2017 14

1. What goals (organizational and/ or local), performance measures, and/ or strategies were project expected to impact?

1.2.3

Customer Feedback Score

• Improve the average customer feedback score from the existing 4.1

No. of observations related to rework and GDP

• Reduction in no. of observations in internal quality audit related to ‘Rework’ and ‘Good Documentation Practice (GDP)

3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

4.3

Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 2014 Q4 2014 Q1 2015

CSI Score

0

10

20

30

40

50

IA-1 2014 IA-2 2014 IA-1 2015

Obs#

8

March 10, 2017 15

2. What was the relationship between the stated measures and perceived gap in 1.2.1?

1.2.3

3. What was the problem/ project objective statement that expresses where the organization wanted to be at the end of the project?

Performance Measure:

Improving customer feedback related to quality of work and reduction in audit findings related to rework and GDP.

Perceived gap:

Lack of culture of quality in the organization

Specific Problem Statement: A dedicated team needs to be setup who’s over-arching goal will be to build a quality culture in the organization. The team will target to improve customer feedback related to quality work to 4.3 and reduction in internal audit findings related to rework & GDP by 20% by June 2016.

March 10, 2017 16

1. How were the stakeholder groups identified?

1.3.1

Supplier

• R&D

Input

• Extended support in NPDP from Stryker Division

Process

• Design and development for Stryker divisions

Output

• CSI score • Internal

audit report

Customer

• Divisions

SIPOC Analysis was used to identify the stakeholders

9

March 10, 2017 17

2 . What and who were the stakeholder groups?

1.3.1

Interest

Imp

act

Lo

w

Med

H

igh

Low Med High

Divisional Customers

Quality group

R&D group

Leadership Team

March 10, 2017

18

1 . What knowledge or skill sets were determined to be necessary for successful completion of the project?

1.3.2

2 . To what extent did the existing stakeholder groups have the required knowledge or skills?

3 . What additional knowledge and skills were brought in to make the project successful?

Required knowledge / Skill sets

Stakeholders

Quality Team R&D Leadership team Divisional Customers

7 QC tools Expert Expert Expert Expert

Project Planning Basic Intermediate Expert Expert

ISO 13485 Intermediate Basic Expert Expert

Event plans & Branding

Basic Basic Intermediate Intermediate

Additional Knowledge/skill sets

ASQ - CQE - -

Team Building/engagement

-

10

March 10, 2017 19

1 . Before the project started, what specific training was done?

1.3.3

2 . Before the project started, what was done to prepare the team to work together as a team?

Training on project management

ISO training QC tools

Team Building workshop

Team engagement session by HR

Formation of QUALITY FIRST FORUM

March 10, 2017 20

1 . What roles and expectations were determined ahead of the project?

1.3.4

Team Members Branding Training evaluation and plan

Celebration Feedback (Survey/1:1)

Project Management

Yogesh Girdhar

Rishabh Mathur

Ishika Bhattacharya

Navodit Singh

Ashima Goel

Gopal Krishan

Rohit Arora

Dheeraj Sood

Sneha Ranjan

Divya Tripathi

Jigar Gorasia

Natasha Rajkumar

Gagan Jain

Kumkum Sharma

11

March 10, 2017 21

2 . What deadlines and deliverables did the team have to consider ahead of actually starting the project?

1.3.4

March 10, 2017 22

3 . Before the project started, what team routines, including communication, were established?

1.3.4

Start Date 16th July 2014

Meeting Day Every Friday

Venue IndiaVBP 7F, Simplex

Time 3:30 pm to 4:30 pm

No of meetings

86

Average attendance

88%

Communication Mailers

Weekly Sessions

Brandings

12

Section 2.

Current Situation

and Root Cause

/ Improvement

Opportunity

Analysis

March 10, 2017 23

March 10, 2017

24

1 . What specific goals and/ or measures was the team trying to achieve with the project?

2.1.1

1. Increased Customer satisfaction

2. Reduced findings in internal quality audit

3. Boost in employee morale

1. Analyze gaps in Quality

2. Reduce defects/findings

3. Create awareness on quality

4. Train and engage employees to “live” quality

1. Periodic quality wellness checks

2. Increase in customer feedback score to 4.35

3. Reduction of internal audit findings and GDP practices by 20%

Consistency and Sustenance

Enhanced Reputation

2 . What additional potential benefits, other than the specific goals and/ or measures, was project expected to impact?

13

March 10, 2017 25

1 . What methods and/ or tools were used to identify possible root causes/ improvement opportunities?

2.2.1

5 Why’s

Ishikawa Diagram

Gemba Walk

March 10, 2017 26

2 . Why were these methods and/ or tools selected [to identify possible root causes/improvement opportunities]?

2.2.1

Personnel and expertise

Resources

Level of Stakeholder participation

Time

Limitations

3. How was the team prepared to use these methods and/ or tools [to identify possible root causes/improvement opportunities?

Team Preparation Method/Tool selection criteria

Training Knowledge

sharing

Research Briefing & Discussion

Bench-marking

Case Studies

14

March 10, 2017 27

1. What data was generated and how was the data analyzed to identify the possible root cause/improvement opportunities?

2.2.2

Data generation

Customer Feedback

Internal Audit

Data Analysis

Customer Satisfactory index generated every 3

months

Pareto analysis to find the most significant area of

improvement

Ishikawa diagram & Gemba walk to identify

possible root causes

Internal audit reports (all functions to be covered once in a year)

Pareto analysis to find the most significant area of improvement

5 Why’s approach to identify possible root causes

2. What were the possible root cause/improvement opportunities?

Possible Root causes

Lack of awareness

High volume

Insufficient training

Complicated steps

Lack of clear communication

Lack of employee engagement

Traditional hierarchical management

Deficiency in access to information

Focus on individual work, not process

Operational inconsistency

March 10, 2017 28

1. What methods and/or tools were used to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

2.3.1

2. Why were these methods and/or tools selected [to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

3. How was the team prepared to use these methods and/or tools [to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

Avoid speculation/ assumptions

Avoid logic traps

Conducted by selected expert team

Skill Alignment

Open discussion

Screen possible root causes by finding linkages and patterns through a Cause map

Rank based on: • Severity • Occurrence

This methodology …

15

29

1. What data was generated and how was the data analyzed in order to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

2.3.2

Lack of employee

engagement

Lack of awareness

High volume

Insufficient training

Complicated steps

Lack of clear communication

Traditional hierarchical

management

Deficiency in access to

information

Focus on individual work, not process

Operational inconsistency

2. What are the specific examples of data analysis that led to the final root cause?

Data generation

Identification of possible root

causes

Data analysis

Find linkages and patterns through a

Cause map

Rank based on:

Severity

Frequency

Cause S F Score

Lack of awareness

9 6 54

Insufficient training

10 4 40

Sample

March 10, 2017 30

3. What was (were) the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(s)?

2.3.2

Lack of awareness

High volume

Insufficient training

Complicated steps

Lack of clear communication

Lack of employee engagement

Traditional hierarchical management

Deficiency in access to information

Focus on individual work, not process

Operational inconsistency

16

March 10, 2017 31

1. How was (were) the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies) validated?

2.3.3

2. What evidence showed that the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies) were validated prior to solution development?

Validation - Survey

Target

Selection

Design

Random Sample

Questionnaire that enables us to obtain credible data

Customers/Divisional partners can identify the specific problems they encounter

3 customers/Divisional partners were selected randomly

Simple questionnaire with a scale of ‘strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree for each of the causes identified

Evidence Evaluation of results Analysis of results and final corroboration of the final root causes

Customer

March 10, 2017 32

1. How was the correctness of the initial project scope, deliverables, and timing confirmed (or, hat changes were made)?

2.4.1

Project Goals

Project Measures

Project plan

1. Analyze gaps in Quality

2. Rectify defects/findings

3. Create awareness on quality

4. Train and engage employees to “live” quality

Confirmed, no change

1. Periodic quality wellness checks

2. Increase in customer feedback score to 4.35

3. Rectification of internal audit findings and GDP practices by 20%

Confirmed, no change

Confirmed, no change

17

March 10, 2017

2. How were the stakeholders involved and/or communicated with during the root cause/improvement opportunity phase of the project?

2.4.1

3. What stakeholder resistance was identified and/or addressed in this phase of the project?

Communication

The team routines determined at the start of the

project were continued for communication in this phase

as well.

Communication Mailers

Weekly Sessions

Brandings

Stakeholder Resistance Concern

Divisional Customers No resistance

R& D Concerned that additional responsibility might affect other deliverables

Leadership Team No resistance

Quality No resistance

Negligible/Low High Medium

The concern of the R&D team was addressed by dividing and scheduling tasks for the team members well in advance and working them around other deliverables such that those timelines are not affected. 33

March 10, 2017 34

4. How was the appropriateness of the initial team membership and management routines confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

2.4.1

Management

Skill set

Routines

Communication

Commitment

Cooperation

Confidence

Camaraderie

18

Section 3.

Solution/

Improvement

Development

March 10, 2017 35

March 10, 2017 36

1. What methods and/or tools were used to identify the possible solutions/improvements?

3.1.1

Brainstorming sessions

2. Why were these methods and/or tools selected [to identify the possible solutions/improvements]?

METHODS TO FIND SOLUTIONS

Group has more potential than an

individual

Different perspective for

solution by other firms

Fundamental means of achieving Quality

improvement.

ROOT CAUSE

Lack of Awareness

Insufficient Training

Lack of Employee Engagement

Research

QC Tools

19

Brainstorming sessions

METHODS TO FIND SOLUTIONS

Research

QC Tools

March 10, 2017 37

3. How was the team prepared to use the methods and/or tools[to identify the possible solutions/improvements]?

3.1.1

Meetings to come up with ideas to

select the possible solutions

Researching for similar problems

faced by other firms

ASQ-CQE Training conducted for competence

levelling

March 10, 2017 38

1. What data was generated and how was the possible data analyzed to determine the possible solutions/improvements?

3.1.2

ROOT CAUSE

Lack of Awareness

Insufficient Training

Lack of Employee Engagement

Survey

Training Gap

Analysis

Gallup

Pie Chart

Skill Matrix

Q12

20

March 10, 2017 39

2. What are the possible solutions/improvements?

3.1.2

March 10, 2017 40

3. What evidence showed that the solutions/improvements identified were possible instead of final?

3.1.2

Pie Chart Skill Matrix Q12

Skill matrix was developed for area for improvement identification.

Score of employees

30%-50% 50%-70% 70%-100%

3.1 3.4

0

1

2

3

4

5

Quiz-1 Quiz-2

Q12 Scores

Total score

21

March 10, 2017 41

1. What methods and/or tools were used to identify the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.1

Problem Finding

Fact Finding Problem

Definition

Idea Finding Selection Planning

Sell Idea Action

March 10, 2017 42

2. Why were these methods and/or tools selected [to identify the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.1

22

March 10, 2017 43

3. How was the team prepared to use these methods and/or tools [to identify the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.1

Training on Simplex Method and its application on the life problem solution given by Lean 6 Sigma Council.

Each member was made an Ambassador of Quality to initiate a sense of responsibility for driving Stryker towards better Quality.

March 10, 2017 44

1. How were the methods and/or tools used to determine the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.2

Problem Finding Fact Finding

Problem Definition

AUDITS

23

March 10, 2017 45

1. How were the methods and/or tools used to determine the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.2

Idea Finding

Team Engagement activities

Quality recognizing awards

Trainings

Quality uplifting events

Quality corner showcases

Selection

• Brainstorming sessions • QC Tools

Planning Sell Idea

March 10, 2017 46

1. How were the methods and/or tools used to determine the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.2

Action

24

March 10, 2017 47

2. What was (were) the final solution(s) /improvement(s)?

3.2.2

Team Engagement activities

Quality recognizing awards

Trainings Quality uplifting events

Quality corner showcases

March 10, 2017 48

1. How were the final solution(s)/improvement(s) validated?

3.2.3

2. What evidence showed that validation was performed prior to implementation?

PROSPECTIVE VALIDATION

25

March 10, 2017 49

1. What additional potential benefits were anticipated from the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

3.2.4

ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

SPEED

PERFORMANCE

VALUE INTERDEP-ENDENCE

MUTUAL TRUST

2. Were the additional potential benefits anticipated prior to implementation?

Consistency

Enhancing Reputation

Sustenance

Benefits anticipated during the solution finding stage.

March 10, 2017 50

1. What data was generated and how was the data analyzed to justify why the chosen final solution(s)/improvement(s) should be implemented?

3.2.5

The criteria for implementation was met.

Approval and acknowledgement from the Stakeholders were taken.

26

March 10, 2017 51

2. What evidence showed that justification was performed prior to implementation?

3.2.5

Team engagement activities

Trainings

Quality corner showcases

Quality uplifting events

Quality recognition awards

Increased Customer satisfaction

Reduced findings in internal quality audit

Boost in employee morale

Consistency in performance

Recognition among customers

Increased Team engagement

Increased business opportunities Problem Finding

Fact Finding

Problem Definition

Idea Finding

Selection

Planning

Sell Idea

Action

Justification for solution was done before the implementation.

March 10, 2017 52

1. How was the correctness of the initial or updated project scope, deliverables, and timing confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

3.3.1

18% error was seen in Plan v/s Actual

27

March 10, 2017 53

2. How were stakeholders involved and/or communicated with during the solution/improvement phase of the project?

3.3.1

Stakeholders Involvement Communication

Divisional Customers Mentorship Quarterly Meeting/ E-Mail

R&D Teams Planning/Execution Weekly meeting/ E-Mail

Leadership Team Planning/Execution Monthly meeting/ E-Mail

Quality Team Execution Weekly meeting/ E-Mail

March 10, 2017 54

3. What stakeholder resistance was identified and/or addressed in this phase of the project ?

3.3.1

Stakeholders Resistance Identification

Resistance Addressed

Divisional Customers Value addition to Stryker

The culture can be horizontally deployed to different divisions.

R&D Teams Decrease in productivity

3 Months prior planning

Leadership Team - -

Quality Team Clear roles and responsibilities

Proper planning

28

March 10, 2017 55

4. How was the appropriateness of the initial or updated team membership and management routines confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

3.3.1

Stakeholders Involvement

Divisional Customers

Mentorship

R&D Teams Planning/Execution

Leadership Team

Planning/Execution

Quality Team Execution

Section 4.

Implementation

and Result

Verification

March 10, 2017 56

29

March 10, 2017 57

1. How were stakeholders involved in planning the solution/improvement implementation?

4.1.1

Stakeholder Planning Implementation

Q4U Core team RA RA

Divisional Customers

I I

R& D C C

Leadership Team C C

Quality C C

2. How were stakeholders involved in implementing the solution/improvement?

March 10, 2017 58

1. What was done to anticipate resistance before it occurred?

4.1.2

Detailed planning

Consideration of each

stakeholders interests and

concerns

Open communication

Periodic meetings/emails

etc.

30

March 10, 2017 59

2. What types of resistance were actually encountered during the course of solution/improvement implementation?

4.1.2

Stakeholder Resistance Identification

Divisional Customers No resistance

Concerns were brought up to the core Q4U team during

weekly meetings

R& D Reduction in time/focus spent for existing deliverables

Leadership Team No resistance

Quality Additional time required for training

3. How was the actual resistance identified?

March 10, 2017 60

1. How was the actual resistance addressed?

4.1.3

2. How did the team know it was successful in addressing the resistance?

Stakeholder Resistance Solution Success

Divisional Customers

No resistance - -

R& D Reduction in time/focus spent for existing deliverables

Detailed planning of specific roles and responsibilities during events taking into account individual’s work plans

Positive feedback from the stakeholder

Leadership Team No resistance - -

Quality Additional time required for training

Detailed planning to schedule trainings around other tasks without impacting them

Appreciation received from the stakeholder

31

March 10, 2017 61

1. What was the evidence of stakeholder group buy-in?

4.1.4

2. What evidence showed that buy-in was obtained prior to implementation?

Unrestrained involvement

Support and commitment

Approval of plans

Budget allocation and approval

March 10, 2017 62

1. What process(es) or system(s) were changed or created to implement the solution/improvement?

4.2.1

Solu

tio

ns

iden

tifi

ed

• Team engagement activities • Quality recognition awards • Quality corner showcases • Trainings • Quality uplifting events

Syst

ems

crea

ted

fo

r im

ple

men

tati

on

• Creation of annual calendar for all the activities

• Creation of sub teams within Q4U team with clearly defined roles and responsibilities for each event

• Creation of feedback system after every event

• Procedure to document ‘lessons learnt’ for continuous system improvement

2. What systems were changed or created to measure and manage the performance of the implementation?

Evaluation improvement within the organization

• Questionnaire • Skill matrix • Q12

Evaluation of customer feedback

Evaluation of internal audit findings related to rework and GDP

32

March 10, 2017 63

1. What were the results?

4.3.1

Evaluation improvement within the organization

Questionnaire Skill matrix Q12

3.97

3.52

0

10

20

30

Quiz-1 Quiz-2 Quiz-3 Quiz-4

High scorers

(+75%)

High scorers (+75%)

March 10, 2017 64

1. What were the results?

4.3.1

Evaluation of customer feedback

Evaluation of internal audit findings related to rework and GDP

Customer Satisfaction Index

4.10 4.40

0

10

20

30

40

50

IA-1 2014 IA-2 2014 IA-1 2015 IA-2 2015 IA-1 2016

Obs# IA-2 2015 28 % reduction IA-1 2016 20% reduction

33

2. How did the results compare to the specific project goals/measures from Item 2.1.1?

4.3.1

Periodic quality wellness checks

Increase in customer feedback score to 4.35

Reduction in no. of observations in internal quality audit related to ‘Reworks’ and ‘GDP by 20%.

Questionnaire

Skill matrix

Q12

CSI- 4.40

More than 20% reduction

Analyze gaps in Quality

Rectify defects/findings

Create awareness on quality

Train and engage employees to “live” quality

Increased Customer satisfaction

Reduced findings in internal quality audit

Boost in employee morale

Organizational goals Project goals Project measures

65

March 10, 2017 66

1. What additional benefits were realized from the project?

4.3.2

2. How did the team measure any of the additional benefits that were ”soft”?

Consistency in performance

Recognition among customers

Increased value addition

Increased Team engagement

• Feedback from team managers • Peer to peer feedback • Improved efficiency in deliverables

• Customer feedback • Appreciation from customers • Enhanced reputation among divisional

partners/customers Increased business

opportunities

Wit

hin

th

e o

rgan

izat

ion

Ou

tsid

e th

e o

rgan

izat

ion

34

March 10, 2017 67

3. How do the actual additional benefits that were realized compare to the expected additional benefits identified in Item 3.2.4?

4.3.2

Consistency in performance

Recognition among customers

Increased value addition

Increased Team engagement

ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

SPEED

PERFORMANCE

VALUE INTERDEP-ENDENCE

MUTUAL TRUST

Consistency

Increased business

opportunities

Section 5.

Sustaining and

Communicating

Results

March 10, 2017 68

35

March 10, 2017 69

1. What was done to make sure the process or system changes made during the implementation (Item 4.2.1) continued to be followed?

5.1.1

Systems for implementation

Documenting of lessons learnt for continuous system improvement

Creation of annual calendar for all the activities

Creation of sub teams within Q4U team with clearly defined roles and responsibilities for each event

Creation of feedback system after every event

Process owner

Stakeholder/User department with support from Q4U team

Q4U team

Q4U team

Q4U team

Plan

The learnings identified will be recorded and integrated into the systems or procedures applicable by the stakeholder in consultation with Q4U team if required

Release the annual calendar in the first month of the year

The procedure to divide sub teams will continue to be based on skill set evaluation and will be re-evaluated every 6 months to allow employee development

Dedicated sub team within Q4U will carry out this activity

At Stryker, quality is first in everything we do. We are driven to make healthcare better for our customers by providing innovative products and services that meet regulatory requirements through our effective quality system.

March 10, 2017 70

2. What evidence showed that this became part of the organization’s culture/operating strategy?

5.1.1

Quality policy

Encouraging peer

involvement

Maintaining a leadership

emphasis on quality.

Ensuring message

credibility

Increasing employee

ownership and empowerment

36

March 10, 2017 71

1. What was done to make sure the benefits obtained from the implementation (Item 4.2.1) will be maintained?

5.1.2

2. What evidence showed that this became part of the organization’s culture/operating strategy?

Quality Policy Team engagement activities

Trainings Quality corner showcases

Quality uplifting events

Quality recognition awards

Increased Customer satisfaction

Reduced findings in internal quality audit

Boost in employee morale

Consistency in performance

Recognition among customers

Increased Team engagement

Increased business opportunities

KRA Make each individual

responsible for quality

Make the culture of quality a personal objective

March 10, 2017 72

1. How did the team communicate the results to the various stakeholders groups?

5.2.1

Mailers R&R Periodic meetings

37

March 10, 2017

Thank you

73