Web Analytics Report Optimization - ASQ...Web Analytics Report Optimization ©2017.eClerx Services Ltd. An ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Company eClerx at a Glance Deep Domain. We have deep experience

1

©2017.eClerx Services Ltd. An ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Company

Web Analytics Report Optimization


eClerx at a Glance

Deep Domain.We have deep experience and insights into

best practices developed from servicing

multiple industry leading clients

Key Stats :

Automate and Reengineer.We leverage our technology, analytics and

industry expertise to reengineer, automate and

improve functions; focusing on business

outcomes and cost reduction

Complex Functions. We specialize in transitioning, managing and

transforming complex and business facing

“middleware” functions

Offices in London, New York, Philadelphia, India, Silicon Valley, Austin, Dublin, Milan, Munich, Lille, Hamburg & Singapore.

$200MM revenues >9,000 employeesFounded in 2000

FINANCIAL SERVICES

DIGITALCHAT SERVICES

2


eClerx Verticals

eClerx supports core business processes for its clients

▪ Specialist middle and back office support

provided to world’s largest banks and

hedge funds

▪ Asset classes including equity, fixed

income, loans, currencies and

commodities supported

▪ Key services include trade documentation,

reconciliations, confirmations, settlements,

risk management and reference data

management

eClerx Markets

▪ Services provided to leading global

hi-tech, manufacturing, retail, travel

and leisure enterprises

▪ Services include commerce & content,

data management, analytics & insights

eClerx Digital

▪ Services provided to leading cable,

internet and telecom providers in the

US and UK

▪ Services include spend optimization,

customer care monitoring & analytics,

quality control on work orders

eClerx Customer Operations


Accolades

Analyst

Recognition

Service

Excellence &

Technology

Knowledge

Management &

HR Practices

Organization

3


Process Background

Client expects accurate and timely delivery

of the metrics reports for various products to

track and predict future trends and

develop their marketing strategy

Over a period of time, the frequent

and ever-increasing ad-hoc requests

from clients have exhausted the

resource utilization capacity

The team was utilizing between 90% to 95%

of the capacity and couldn’t cater to the

additional ad-hoc client requests due to which

the client was dissatisfied to some extent

eClerxDigital Analytics Team

©2017.eClerx Services Ltd. An ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Company©2017.eClerx Services Ltd. An ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Company

Project and Team Selection1

4


1.1.0 | Understanding the Context for Project Selection

Client eClerxOne of the leading

e-commerce websites in

the United States

strategizes its marketing

techniques based on the

Metrics Reports

prepared by eClerx

Service provider

driving client’s

business through

data-driven

Insights for

various metrics

Project Approval

Committee

Marketing Manager (Client) Associate Principal (eClerx)

Program Manager (eClerx)Quality Head (eClerx)

Project Steering

Committee

Associate Principal (Sponsor) Program Manager (Champion)

Sr. Process Manager (Lead) Six Sigma Black Belt (Mentor)

1.0.0: PROJECT AND TEAM SELECTION

1.1.1. 1 – Who was responsible for selecting the project?


About eClerx Specialist teamProvides Reports and Insights to

the client business on various

metrics and global regions

Activities InvolvedReports and Insights for:

1. Daily sales,

2. Daily spend,

3. Conversion and retail

business

1.1.0 | Understanding the Context for Project Selection

1.1.1. 2 – What background information on the company or those who selected the project was provided to better understand the context of the project?

One of the

leading e-

commerce

websites in

the United

States

Metrics Report

About the Client

Leading e-commerce

company headquartered

in the US


eClerx

Service

Provider

Line of Business

Shoes, Eye Wear,

Handbags, Apparel,

Retail & Café Stores

Sold Online

Shoes, Eye Wear,

Handbags, Apparel

Driving Activities

Marketing Strategies

based on the Metrics

report

5


1.2.0 | Project Selection Process

1.2.1. 1 – How was the gap or opportunity brought to the attention of the project identification group?1.2.1. 2 – What was the opportunity (process improvement)?


Voice of the Client“We need to continuously review

and evaluate our marketing

strategies for which we need your

support on timely delivery of the

reports as per our change requests”

Strategic Process

RequirementsReduce the resource utilization in

maintenance activities of the reports and

cater to the ad-hoc client requests

Quarterly Business

Review

Critical Process

Requirements1. Easy incorporation of changes in

the reports

2. Timely delivery of accurate reports

Key Improvement

Opportunities1. Reduce maintenance and report

creation time

2. Eliminate all Opportunities of Errors

Project Goal StatementReduce the report creation and

maintenance time of the reports by

approximately 50% and eliminate all

possible opportunities of errors

related to referencing of formulae by

March 2017


LegendSteps with high cycle time & lead time

Tool 1

Tool 2

Database 1

Database 2

Tool 3

Data Cleansing, Standardization

Reporting & insights

Audit

Client

Updates

Client’s Server

II I

Data Extraction

C/T – 475 min

300 min

C/T – 785 min

600 min

C/T – 935 min

600 min

C/T – 460 min

350 min

C/T – 87 min

100 min

Total C/T – 2742 min / week

Lead Time – 1950 min / week

End to end Reporting and Insight Generation Time including the idle time per Week· Per week – 4692 min (approximately 80 hours)· Per Quarter – Approximately 900 hours· Resource Utilization ~ 90%

Business Non Value Adding Activity

Value Adding Activity

1.2.1. 3 – What area of the organization had the gap or opportunity?


▪ Daily sales

reporting

▪ Daily spend

monitoring and

reporting

▪ Conversion

reporting

▪ Retail business

reporting

eClerx Category Specialist Team

AMER

EMEA

Opportunity for Improvement

There was a need to re-look at the entire process to meet the strategic objectives of the client


6


1.2.2. 1 – What data was generated to help select the project? 1.2.2. 2 – What methods and / or tools were used to assess or prioritize the need for the project? 1.2.2. 3 – Why were these methods and /or tools used to select the project?


DATA METHOD WHY?

Voice of Customer Quarterly Business Review Feedback

Quarterly Business Review is an opportunity to review the current performance

and understand the client's requirements

Clients feedback on the performance is valuable and is the driving force for the

process to improve the overall customer experience

Critical to Quality Metrics Critical to Quality drill down tree To distinguish the Project 'Y' from Business 'Y'

SIPOC & VSMA SIPOC and VSM was prepared in VISIO

with the help of Subject Matter Experts

To connect the upstream / downstream processes and identify the Value and Non

Value-added activities inherent to the process

Project Selection and Prioritization Pugh MatrixTo gauge viability of the project as per eClerx project selection criteria and set

priority for the Six Sigma project selection

Threat and Opportunity Matrix 4 quadrant Matrix To identify the threats and benefits of taking up a Six Sigma project

Report Maintenance Time Data Process Productivity TrackerTo baseline the maintenance time taken to incorporate the client's changes in the

reports and evaluate the cost of each report

Delivery Delay Data Process Productivity Tracker To baseline the delays

Stakeholder Analysis Stakeholder Analysis MatrixTo identify key stakeholders and their level of support and to measure resistance,

if any



1.2.3. 1 – What goals (organizational and / or local), performance measures, and / or strategies was the project expected to impact? 1.2.3. 2 – What was the relationship between the stated measures and perceived gap in 1.2.1?

Strategic Goals

Critical Process Goals

Key Improvement Goals

Track sales, predict future trends and strategize

marketing techniques for revenue generation

Easy incorporation of client changes in the reports and

timely delivery of accurate reports

1. Reduce maintenance and report creation time

2. Eliminate all possible Opportunities of

Referencing Errors

Perceived Gap


(1.2.3.2)

Strategic Process Requirements

Reduce the resource utilization in maintenance activities

of the reports and cater to the ad-hoc client requests


7


1.2.3. 3 – What was the problem / project objective statement that expressed where the organization wanted to be at the end of the project?

ImprovementOpportunity

Current Maintenance Hours

Goal

Report Maintenance time ~900 hours Quarterly ~450 hours Quarterly

OFRE** ~76,000 0

Problem Statement

Over a period of time, reports

have become a complex web of

formulae referencing each other,

making it difficult and time-

consuming to troubleshoot and

maintain reports

For the period (Q2 – 15 to Q2 -

16), the amount of time invested

in maintaining reports by

adapting changes requested by

clients was on an average ~900

man-hours on a quarterly

basis.(~90% Resource

Utilization)


Project Objective

The objective is to reduce the maintenance time and cost invested in the

report creation activity by approximately 50% and eliminate all possible

Opportunities of Errors related to referencing of formulae

**OFRE – Opportunities of Errors related to Referencing of Formulae



1.3.0 | Team Selection and Preparation

1.3.1. 1 – How were the stakeholder groups identified? 1.3.1. 2 – What or who were the stakeholder groups?

What were the Stakeholder Groups? Who were the Stakeholders? How were the Stakeholders identified?

▪ Sponsor

▪ Champion

▪ Master Blackbelt

▪ eClerx defined

structure (1.1.1A)

▪ Project Lead (Green

Belt)

▪ Process SMEs

▪ Knowledge

Management (KM)

▪ Project Lead selected

by Operations Head

▪ Process SMEs –

identified by Senior

Process Manager

▪ KM: Dedicated

knowledge team for

operations

▪ Black Belt

▪ Dedicated Quality

resources mapped

by Program / Vertical

▪ Senior Process

Manager

▪ Process Manager

▪ Analysts /

Sr. Analysts

▪ Using detailed

process flows

mapping all

upstream and

downstream

processes within

eClerx

▪ Manager – Product

and Catalogue

▪ Point of contact from

client organization

Project Steering Committee

Project Team

Quality Team

Process Owners

Client SPOC


8



1.3.2. 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? 1.3.2. 3 – What additional knowledge and skills were brought in to make the project successful?

Knowledge and Skills Determined

Project SteeringCommittee

Project Team Process Owners Black Belt

AlreadyTrained

AdditionalAlreadyTrained



Additional

Domain / Process Knowledge

▪ Knowledge of e-commerce domain ✓ – ✓ – ✓ – ✓ –

▪ Knowledge of Process tools and systems ✓ – ✓ – ✓ – ✓ –

▪ Knowledge of Process Execution steps NA – ✓ – ✓ – NA NA

Quality Knowledge

▪ Lean Six Sigma Methodology ✓ – ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

▪ Basic Quality Tools ✓ – ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Skills

▪ Leadership ✓ – NA NA NA NA NA NA

▪ Communication ✓ – ✓ – ✓ ✓

▪ Project Management ✓ – ✓ ✓ ✓

▪ Decision Making ✓ – ✓ ✓ ✓

▪ Conflict Management ✓ – ✓ ✓ ✓

▪ Team Work ✓ – ✓ – ✓ ✓

▪ Problem Solving ✓ – ✓ – ✓ ✓



1.3.3. 1 – Before the project started, what specific training was done?

Training

What was done?

Lean Six Sigma Six Sigma Green Belt

Basic Quality Tools

Conflict Management

Project Management

All project team

members undertook the

LSS methodology

training under the

guidance of a Black Belt

An internal 72 hours Six

Sigma GB training was

conducted, as

mandated by eClerx

Quality Framework for

the Project Lead

The team was

familiarized the project

team with various tools /

methods in Quality

which would be used

later in this project

Conflict Management

Training was conducted

to enable the team to

resolve issues that

might arise in any of the

project’s phases

Project Management

tools and methodology

training was conducted

for the Project Lead and

the Project team

members

Conceptual knowledge

of Lean and Six Sigma

methods and tools

Understanding the

DMAIC framework and

how it can be

implemented

Understanding

fundamental Quality

tools and its

implementation

Team’s ability to resolve

any internal issues

which may arise during

the course of the project

Being aware of project

management basics

and toolsOutcome Expected


9


1.3.3. 2 – Before the project started, what was done to prepare the team to work together effectively?

421 3 5

Project plan shared

with team

(GANTT Chart)

Email distribution

list created [email protected]

Common repository

for project documentation

created using SharePoint

Project kick-off

meeting with

Sponsor / Champion

An initial meeting with

the sponsor / champion

was conducted to

reiterate the project

goals and get a formal

sign-off on the same

Project kick-off meeting

with project team and

process owners

An initial meeting with

the project team along

with the project lead was

conducted for

expectation-setting and

to explain the role of

each team member in

the project

A Project Gantt chart was

created to detail steps for

each project phase, their

expected completion dates

and tollgate review dates.

The GANTT Chart was

shared with all stakeholder

groups indicating where their

support will be required

A common email

distribution list with all

project stakeholders was

created so that no team

member is missed out

when sending email

communication

For storing all

documentation related to

the project to be referred

to during the project and

for future reference

purposes, a common

repository was built

Objective

Task



1.3.4. 1 – What roles and expectations were determined ahead of the project?

Role D M A I C

Project Sponsor A A A A A

Project Champion A A A A A

Project Lead M M M M M

Team Member M M M M M

Quality Head I I I I I

Blackbelt R R R R R

Client SPOC I I I I I

Knowledge Management R R R R R

Role Expectations of the role

Project

Sponsor

▪ Oversee that process improvement projects are aligned to the company’s business goals and

strategies

▪ Ensure that the right team members are selected for the project

▪ Get buy-in from all the project stakeholders

▪ Approve any financials that are required for completing the project

Project

Champion

▪ Act as a Subject Matter Expert for the process and guide the project team from time to time

▪ Supervise the project team and assist in decision making

▪ Validate how low control – high impact factors identified in the project can be taken forward for solution

Project Lead

▪ Green Belt resource responsible for driving the improvement project

▪ Ensure data availability for analysis

▪ Follow Project Management timelines and ensure timely completion of each phase

▪ Highlight / call out any challenges that may arise in the project and seek guidance from project sponsor

/ champion if necessary

Team Member

▪ Contribute with process knowledge and expertise during the project

▪ Provide helping hand to Green belt for data gathering and analysis

▪ Contribute during brainstorming sessions in identifying causes and solution gathering

Quality Head /

Master

Blackbelt

▪ Oversee organization-wide quality initiatives

▪ Review and approve viable Six Sigma projects taken up in the organization

▪ Provide guidance to Black Belt with their expertise during project phase

Project Mentor

/ Blackbelt

▪ Guidance from Lean Six Sigma Black Belts on process improvement methodologies

▪ Train Green Belts on Six Sigma methodologies prior to project initiation

▪ Guide Green Belts from initiation till completion of improvement projects

▪ Influence people’s decision with respect to process change management

ApproverApproval of team decisions outside their charter /

authorities, i.e. sponsor, business leader

ResourceResource to the team, one whose expertise, skills,

‘clout’ are needed

MemberMember of team, within the authorities and boundaries

of the charter

InformedInterested party, one who will need to be kept informed

on direction, findings



mailto:[email protected]

10


1.3.4 2 – What deadlines and deliverables did the team have to consider ahead of actually starting the project?

High Level DMAIC Deliverables

Focus Group Segmentation Multi-Voting Feasibility studyFocus Group Measure Analyze Improve Control

▪ Identify and

prioritize possible

Xs (Cause and

Effect Analysis)

▪ Control and Impact

Analysis

▪ Data Collection

Plan

▪ Identify and

validate vital Xs

(Data / Process

Door Analysis)

▪ Root Cause

Identification

▪ Generate possible

solutions

▪ Prioritize and pilot

Solutions

▪ Validate and justify

solutions

▪ Implement

solutions

▪ Process Control

Analysis

▪ Quality Net Saving

calculations

▪ Monitoring and

Response Plan

▪ Institutionalize

and Sign-off

▪ Project Selection

and Prioritization

▪ Project Charter

(with approval)

▪ SIPOC /

Process Flow

Define

August 2016 September 2016 October 2016 February 2017 March 2017

TOLLGATE TOLLGATE TOLLGATE TOLLGATE TOLLGATE




1.3.4. 3 – Before the project started, what team routines, including communication, were established?

What Team Routines? How? Responsibility Frequency

Project Plan shared in common

SharePoint locationAn alert email triggered to all stakeholders with any change in the project plan Project Lead / Black Belt Need Basis

Update all project documentationThe project documentation for each phase to be completed and update to be

mailed to the entire project teamKnowledge Management On phase completion

Weekly Huddle All team members to meet once a week to discuss the project’s status Project Lead Weekly

Tollgate ReviewsBy the end of each phase, a tollgate review was scheduled with the Sponsor /

Champion / Client SPOCProject Lead / Black Belt On phase completion

Minutes of Meeting MOMs to be circulated to all project stakeholders for every meeting Project Lead As per meeting schedule

Sign-off Procedure All key decisions / changes to be signed off by Sponsor / Champion via e-mail Project Lead / Black Belt Need Basis

Project Gantt Chart



11


Current Situation and Root Cause / Improvement Opportunity Analysis

2


2.1.0 | Key Measures Expected of the Project

2.1.1. 1 – What specific goals and / or measures was the team trying to achieve with the project? 2.1.1. 2 – What additional potential benefits, other than the specific goals and / or measures, was the project expected to impact?

Voice of the Customer

Critical Process requirements

Project Goals

“We need to

continuously review

and evaluate our

marketing strategies for

which we need your

support on timely

delivery of the reports

as per our change

requests”

Easy Incorporation of

client’s frequent

changes with 100%

reporting accuracy

By March – 2017

1. Reduce maintenance

and report creation

time by ~50

2. Eliminate all possible

opportunities of

errors related to

referencing of

formulae

Additional Benefits

1. Generation of

additional work /

business

2. Reduced operational

cost for eClerx

3. Improved client

perception

2.0.0: CURRENT SITUATION AND ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS

12


2.2.0 | Possible Root Causes / Improvement Opportunities

2.2.1. 1 – What methods and / or tools were used to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities?2.2.1. 2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected (to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities)?

Process Map

Why was the tool used?

▪ To understand the as-is

process steps followed

▪ To understand the

involvement of upstream

and downstream teams in

the process

Tool Used


▪ To identify all possible

causes for high

maintenance time and low

efficiency in report making

▪ To identify solutions for

each of the bottle necks in

the process

Brain-storming

Fishbone Diagram


▪ To organize the ideas we

collected during the

brainstorming session into

logical buckets

▪ The buckets were: People,

Measurement, Material,

Method, Machine & Mother

Nature


▪ To identify all possible

wastes hampering the

quality and efficiency of

the process

Value StreamMapping



2.2.1. 3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools (to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities)?

Brainstorming Techniques▪ Training on various

brainstorming techniques

▪ To gauge their understanding

level and readiness for usage,

a generic topic was given to the

team for brainstorming

Process Mapping & VSM using MS Visio▪ Process Flow Creation

▪ Value Stream Mapping

▪ MS Visio 2010 (basic flow

chart / swim lane chart)

3 days –4 hours each

2 Days –3 hours each

2 days –3 hours each Cause and Effect

Diagram▪ Usage of Cause and Effect

Analysis (fishbone diagram)


Project Lead Process SMEs Process Owners

Methods / Tools –A pre and post training assessment was conducted for the trainees

People Trained



13


2.2.2. 1 – What data was generated and how was the data analyzed to identify the possible root cause / improvement opportunities? 2.2.2. 2 – What were the possible root cause / improvement opportunities?

Bottlenecks leading to high maintenance and waste in the process

All possible causes leading to high maintenance, waste and high Resource Utilization (RU)

Process Mapping

Categorization of possible causes

Tool usedWhat data was

generated?How was it analyzed?

Control Impact

Matrix

SME

Review

HIGH CONTROL

HIGH IMPACT FACTORS

14 possible root causes / improvement opportunities


1. Maintenance and report creation activity consumes a lot of

RU

2. Too many ad-hoc requests to cater to along with the normal

day-to-day activities

3. Too many data sources from where the data is fetched

4. Unstructured navigation through reports

5. Complex web of formulae interlinking multiple excel sheets

making it difficult to add or amend the excel sheets

6. Data extraction, collation, cleansing, standardization and

reporting is manual

7. High rework in the process

8. Latency due to huge file size and high processing time

9. Stringent timelines to meet ad-hoc client requests

10. Resource intensive data extraction, collation and reporting

process

11. Too much dependency on the tenured resources for report

making and insights

12. No backup for skilled or tenured resources

13. No cross skilling - new resources are not trained to handle

different reports

14. Complex audit steps that make it difficult to diagnose the

reports for errors


Brainstorming

Fishbone

Diagram


To validate the root causes using data

2.3.0 | Final Root Causes / Improvement Opportunities

2.3.1. 1 – What methods and / or tools were used to identify the final root cause(s) / improvement opportunities?2.3.1. 2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected to identify the final root causes(s) / improvement opportunities?

METHODS / TOOLS WHY?

Value Stream Mapping To identify the non-value adding steps leading to waste in the

process

Failure Modes & Effect Analysis (FMEA) To prioritize high-risk areas in the process by calculating RPN for

each step

Attribute Correlation Matrix To identify the key attributes of the product which had maximum

impact and were the key drivers of the client’s requirements

Hypothesis Testing

14



2.3.1. 3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools to identify the final root causes / improvement opportunities?


Methods / Tools


FMEA▪ Training on FMEA fundamentals

▪ Identifying defects and defect

opportunities

▪ Understanding of RPN calculation

▪ Table of Opportunities

Value Stream Mapping▪ Training on VSM Basics

▪ Identifying VA / NVA in process

▪ Process Cycle Efficiency


People Trained


1 day –8 hours

Attribute Correlation Matrix▪ Training on Correlation Matrix

▪ Understanding the gap between

customer’s explicit requirements

and the product attributes

▪ Prioritization of improvement

opportunities




2.3.2. 1 (1/2) – What data was generated and how was the data analyzed in order to identify the final root causes / improvement opportunities? 2.3.2. 2 (1/2) – What are specific examples of data analysis that led to the final root cause?

How was Data Analyzed?

Specific Examples

What Data wasGenerated?

Value Stream Mapping

▪ Grouping of VSM Observations and FMEA RPNs

▪ Listing of common Process Xs

▪ Validation of possible Xs with grouped Xs in VSM

and FMEA

▪ RCA was done on validated possible causes

▪ Validated root causes taken ahead as final root

causes

▪ Non Value Adding steps

▪ Process Waste

▪ Duplicate entries pulled from multiple

columns, resulting in an increase of formulae

and file size

▪ Multiple references in formulae to extract

simple data

▪ Multiple redundant sheets and unnecessary

tabs added to extract data, creating a

complex web of formulae

▪ Hard coding of data in an excel sheet

FMEA

▪ Process Failure Modes

▪ Effects of Failure

▪ Criticality and Severity

▪ Failure Causes

▪ Occurrence and Detection

▪ RPN Number

▪ Manual process with high risk of extracting

incorrect data

▪ Complex web of formulae interlinking multiple

excel sheets, making it difficult to add or amend

the excel sheets

▪ Complex audit steps making it difficult to

diagnose the errors if any

Attribute Correlation Matrix

▪ Complex navigation of reports

▪ Too many data point linkages

▪ Too many tabs to refer to, making it difficult

to read and interpret

▪ Mapping of client’s requirements versus

product design features

▪ Product attributes that are critical to our

customers

▪ Design parameters that are important in

driving those customer’s requirements

▪ To-be design parameters

▪ Explicit customer requirement mapped vis-

à-vis the product features

▪ AS-IS product attributes driving the explicit

customer requirements are highlighted and

further worked upon to incorporate the

client’s requirements


15



2.3.2. 3 – What were the final root causes / improvement opportunities?

Possible Root Causes / Improvement Opportunities (2.2.2. 2)

1. Too much dependency on the tenured resources for report making and insights

2. No backup for skilled or tenured resources

3. Unstructured navigation through reports

4. Complex web of formulae interlinking multiple excel sheets, making it difficult to add or

amend the excel sheets

5. Too many data sources from where the data is fetched

6. Latency due to huge file size and high processing time

7. Complex audit steps that make it difficult to diagnose the reports for errors

8. Resource intensive data extraction, collation and reporting process

9. Stringent timelines to incorporate requested client changes

▪ FMEA

▪ Value Stream Maps

▪ Attribute Correlation Matrix

1. High dependency on the tenured resources

for report making and insights

2. Complex audit steps that make it difficult to

diagnose the reports for errors

3. Complex web of formulae interlinking multiple

excel sheets, making it difficult to add or

amend the excel sheets

Final Root Causes

Analysis (Tools / Methods – 2.3.1.)




2.3.3. 1 – How were the final root causes / improvement opportunities validated? 2.3.3. 2 – What evidence showed that the final root causes / improvement opportunities were validated prior to solution development?

How was Data Validated?

Evidence

What Was Done?

Hypothesis Testing for root cause # 1,2,3

▪ Two-way ANOVA test was conducted to

confirm if there is any impact on the report

creation and maintenance activity due to

different resources and report types

▪ Hypothesis Testing was done to test

if the tenure of the resource impacts

report creation and insight

generation

▪ Report creation data was collected

for different types of reports

▪ Two way

ANOVA

Attribute Agreement Analysis for root cause # 1,2

▪ Conducted individual process assessment of the resources

▪ Individual execution steps scores v/s process standard was noted

▪ AAA

▪ Attribute Agreement Analysis done for resources scores v/s the

standard to confirm if there was any knowledge gap

Report Type

Tenure

Who

lesa

le re

port

Searc

h Ana

lysis

Rep

ort

DSR

Conve

rsion Rep

ort

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 y

ear

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

150

125

100

75

50Re

po

rt M

akin

g T

ime

Boxplot of Report Making Time

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:

Assessment Agreement

Within Appraisers Appraiser vs Standard


16




Evidence

Hypothesis Testing for root cause # 1,2,3 using 2-way ANOVA

Report Type

Tenure

Who

lesa

le re

port

Searc

h Ana

lysis

Rep

ort

DSR

Conve

rsion Rep

ort

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 y

ear

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

150

125

100

75

50Re

po

rt M

akin

g T

ime

Individual Value Plot of Report Making Time vs Report Type, Tenure

Report Type

Tenure

Who

lesa

le re

port

Searc

h Ana

lysis

Rep

ort

DSR

Conve

rsion Rep

ort

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

> 1 y

ear

< 1 yea

r

> 1 yea

r

< 1 yea

r

150

125

100

75

50Re

po

rt M

akin

g T

ime

Boxplot of Report Making Time

Interpretation

Tenure of the

resources and

report types had a

significant impact on

the Reporting and

Insight Generation





Hypothesis Testing for root cause # 1,2 using Attribute Agreement Analysis

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:


Within Appraisers Appraiser vs Standard Interpretation

Based on this data,

we infer that there is a

knowledge gap and

that these resources

need additional

refresher’s training


Evidence

17


2.4.0 | Project Management Update

2.4.1. 1 – How was the correctness of the initial project scope, deliverables, and timing confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

Wk1 Wk2 Wk3 Wk4 Wk5 Wk6 Wk7 Wk8 Wk9 Wk10 Wk11 Wk12 Wk13 Wk14 Wk15 Wk16 Wk17 Wk18 Wk19 Wk20 Wk21 Wk22 Wk23 Wk24 Wk25 Wk26 Wk27 Wk28 Wk29 Wk30 Wk31 Wk32 Wk33 Wk34 Wk35 Wk36

3-Nov 10-Nov 17-Nov 24-Nov 1-Dec 8-Dec 15-Dec 22-Dec 29-Dec 5-Jan 12-Jan 19-Jan 26-Jan 2-Feb 9-Feb 16-Feb 23-Feb 2-Mar 9-Mar 16-Mar 23-Mar 30-Mar 6-Apr 13-Apr 20-Apr 27-Apr 4-May 11-May 18-May 25-May 1-Jun 8-Jun 15-Jun 22-Jun 29-Jun 6-Jul

Start Date End Date

Gather VOC data 3-Nov 8-Nov

Define the Bus iness Case 10-Nov 22-Nov

Understand Stakeholders 17-Nov 22-Nov

Define Problem and Goals 17-Nov 29-Nov

Develop project charter 24-Nov 6-Dec

Define the Process (SIPOC) 24-Nov 6-Dec

Describe the Key Customer and Process Requirements 1-Dec 13-Dec

8-Dec 13-Dec

Map As-Is State of the process 15-Dec 27-Dec

Time Series Plot of Primary Metric 22-Dec 27-Dec

Veri fy Data Qual i ty 22-Dec 3-Jan

Col lect Process Data 15-Dec 11-Jan

Understand Process Behavior 29-Dec 17-Jan

Basel ine Process Capabi l i ty 5-Jan 24-Jan

Conclus ions / Issues / Next Steps 19-Jan 31-Jan

26-Jan 31-Jan

Root Cause - Potentia l Cri tica l X's 26-Jan 14-Feb

Analyze Process Data - Identi fy Signi ficant X's 9-Feb 21-Feb

Root Cause va l idation 16-Feb 7-Mar

Conclus ions / Issues / Next Steps 2-Mar 14-Mar

16-Mar 21-Mar

Generate Potentia l Solutions / Future State VSM 23-Mar 11-Apr

Demonstrate Potentia l Solutions 6-Apr 18-Apr

Select & Test Best Solutions (Pi lot tests ) 13-Apr 23-May

Implement Solutions w/ Action Plan 18-May 30-May

Statement of Y=f(x) 18-May 30-May

Conclus ions / Issues / Next Steps 25-May 30-May

25-May 30-May

Clear Indication of Improved Primary Metric 1-Jun 6-Jun

Formal Control Plan - Control Methods Appl ied 8-Jun 20-Jun

Project Approval by Champion or equiva lent 15-Jun 27-Jun

Discuss Financia l Va l idation 22-Jun 27-Jun

Provide Project Closure Documents 22-Jun 27-Jun

Conclus ions / Issues / Next Steps 22-Jun 27-Jun

29-Jun 4-Jul

29-Jun 11-Jul

Define Tol lgate Review

Week

PHASE ActivitiesStarting

DEF

INE

CON

TRO

L

Control Tol lgate Review

Assessment & Panel Interview

MEA

SUR

E

Measure Tol lgate Review

AN

ALY

ZE

Analyze Tol lgate Review

IMPR

OV

E

Improve Tol lgate Review

Project

deliverables

completed as per

planned dates

Toll Gate

Review + email

Sign-off

Six Sigma Steering

Committee

Quality

Team

Project

Team

Process

Owners

Scope Confirmed, No change Identified



2.4.1. 2 – How were stakeholders involved and / or communicated with during the root cause / improvement opportunity phase of the project?

Stakeholders How They Were Involved

Project Steering

Committee

▪ Participated in Project Steering Meetings

▪ Supported by ensuring resource availability as planned

▪ Provided guidance during project discussions

Process Owners

▪ Actively participated in brainstorming sessions

▪ Helped the project team identify possible root causes

▪ Ensured team attendance in process tests

▪ Helped with required historical data for various analyses

Quality Team

▪ Conducted Quality-specific trainings

▪ Facilitated team on the use of Quality tools / methods

▪ Administered DMAIC phase implementation

Knowledge

Management

Team

▪ Facilitated process tests

▪ Managed all project documentation

▪ Assisted in the creation of process flows

How They Communicated

By When

Steering Committee Meetings Monthly

Tollgate Meetings After each phase of DMAIC

Team Connect Weekly

Email CommunicationBased on project finding and

validation



18


2.4.1. 3 – What stakeholder resistance was identified and / or addressed in this phase of the project?

Stakeholder Group What Resistance? How was it Identified? How was it Resolved?

Project Steering Committee No Resistance

Process Owners No Resistance

Quality Team No Resistance

Knowledge

Management TeamNo Resistance

Client SPOC No Resistance




2.4.1. 4 – How was the appropriateness of the initial team membership and management routines confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

▪ Stakeholder Analysis

▪ Project deadlines achieved as planned

No Changes

▪ Routine checks done on planned dates v/s actual

implementation dates

▪ KM team audited availability of required documentation

▪ Feedback and support received from Sponsor /

Champion

▪ Minutes of meeting published after each meeting

▪ Received email sign-off on phase completion

▪ Routines administered and approved by MBB and BB

No Changes

Team Membership and Management Routines How did we Confirm Appropriateness? What Changes were Made?

Initial Team Membership

Management Routines


19


Solution / Improvement Development

3


3.1.0 | Possible Solutions or Improvements

3.1.1. 1 – What methods and / or tools were used to identify the possible solutions / improvements?3.1.1. 2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected?

5 S was used to re-organize and

optimize the entire process by

eliminating wastes while

improving Quality and Efficiency

5 S

This tool is easy to use and is

capable of generating multiple

solution proposals for a single

cause

Brainstorming

This tool helps us highlight the

attributes or improvement areas

of the product which in turn helps

to meet the client’s expectations


3.0.0: SOLUTION / IMPROVEMENT DEVELOPMENT

20



3.1.1. 3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools?

5 S▪ Understanding the

fundamentals of 5 S

philosophy

1 day –4 hours

Brainstorming Techniques▪ Training on using

brainstorming for arriving at

solutions

▪ To gauge their understanding

level and readiness for

usage, a generic topic was

given to the team for

brainstorming



Methods / Tools

People Trained

1 day –8 hours

Attribute Correlation Metrix▪ Understanding the gap

between the customer’s

explicit requirements and

the product attributes

▪ Prioritization of

improvement opportunities



3.1.2. 1 – What data was generated and how was it analyzed?

What Data was Generated?


Future State VSM was prepared to

analyze the alignment and relevance

of solutions generated by the team

Technical assistance was taken from

the Software team for automation

opportunities in the process

▪ To remove redundancy of data▪ Identify and Eliminate waste in the system

▪ Optimize formula referencing and various process steps▪ Implement data tables▪ Create auto column detection logic

▪ Improve on the visualization▪ Easy navigation menus and dynamic charts▪ Automate Data Extraction, Collation, Reporting and Auditing

▪ Standardize data table structure to eliminate duplication▪ Standardize column structure▪ Implement a dynamic range of formulae

▪ ‘Version Control’ to roll back to the previous version in case of failure▪ ‘Change Log’ to track all changes for future reference


List of potential solutions relating to specific areas in the process

were generated using the 5S methodology as below

Sort

Set in order

Shine

Standardize

Sustain

What Data was Generated?


Brainstorming for idea generation was done

on the data generated through 5S and

Correlation Matrix

Product Parameters

that needed attention

and improvement were:

Too many tabs Too many cell references

Size of the file End to end manual preparation of the reports

21


3.1.2. 2 – What are the possible solutions / improvements?

15 Possible Solutions

1. Auto-scheduler for data extraction

2. Automated data collation, cleansing to identify and remove duplicate and redundant entries

3. Automated report creation

4. Automated audit mechanism

5. Automation to send the reports to the respective clients

6. Advanced navigation and graphics for better user interface

7. Design a new reporting template

8. Develop an automation software for the entire process

9. Remove people dependency by cross-training all the users

10. Build more domain expertise by providing extensive training and personal development in terms of

communication and capability-building

11. Develop a governance framework to ensure that process changes are incorporated in the SOP

12. Conduct Refresher training on concept-clearing, doubt-solving and risk-associated areas that have high impact

13. Build checkpoint mechanisms to ensure that all steps are covered during audits

14. Standardize the reporting template for all regions

15. Initiate regional cross process audits to maintain integrity, ensure standardization and get better results


All of these possible solutions were categorized into different segments using an Affinity Diagram


Final Root Causes


3.1.2. 2 – What are the possible solutions / improvements?


Process Automation

▪ Auto Scheduler for data extraction

▪ Automated data collation, cleansing to

identify and remove duplicate and

redundant entries

▪ Automated report creation

▪ Automated audit mechanism

▪ Automation to send the reports to the

respective clients

▪ Advanced navigation and graphics for

better user interface

▪ Develop an automation software for the

entire process

Training

▪ Remove people dependency by cross-

training all the users

▪ Conduct Refresher training on concept-

clearing, doubt-solving and risk-

associated areas that have a high impact

▪ Build more domain expertise by

providing extensive training and personal

development in terms of communication

and capability- building

Standardization

▪ Design a new reporting template

▪ Develop a governance framework to

ensure that process changes are

incorporated in the SOP

▪ Build checkpoint mechanisms to ensure

that all the steps are covered during

audits

▪ Standardize the reporting template for all

regions

▪ Initiate regional cross process audits to

maintain integrity, ensure standardization

and get better results

Possible solutions categorized into their respective groups


22


3.1.2. 3 – What evidence showed that the solutions / improvements identified were possible instead of final?

Solution Identification and Prioritization

Technical Consultation

SME Validation

Example: Standardizing of

reports across

regions is not

possible due to

region-specific client

change requests.




3.2.0 | Final Solutions or Improvements

3.2.1. 1 – What methods and / or tools were used to identify the final solutions / improvements? 3.2.1. 2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected?

Solution Identification

and Prioritization

Payoff Matrix

Future State Value

Stream Mapping

Focused Group

Discussion

FMEA

Multi-Voting

To identify viability of automation in the process

To narrow the list of solutions and know which solutions most of the

team members agree upon

To detect possible opportunities for defects in solutions generated

To prioritize and eliminate non-feasible solutions from the list of possible solutions

To analyze the alignment and relevance of solutions generated by the team

To identify implementable solutions based on risk and payoff


23


3.2.1. 3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools?

Multi Voting▪ Team was trained on N/3

voting technique

1 day –4 hours

Solution Identification and Prioritization▪ Prioritizing and scoring methodology

for solution identification

▪ Training and practice sessions done

1 day –4 hours

Pay off Matrix▪ Training and practice

sessions done

1 day –2 hours


Methods / Tools

People Trained

* VSM, FMEA and Focused Group Discussion training and preparation were already covered in previous project phases




3.2.2. 1 – How were the methods or tools used to determine the final solutions? 3.2.2. 2 – What was the final solution?

Number Final Solutions

FS1 Auto scheduler for emails, data extraction

FS2 Data collation and cleaning using advanced VBA macro

FS7 New reporting template using advanced graphics and navigation

FS9 Reduce people dependency by cross-training all the users

FS11Governance framework to track the changes in the process to

ensure its incorporation in the SOP

Focused Group Discussion

Multi-Voting

Pay Off Matrix



24


3.2.3. 1 – How were the final solutions validated?

Number Final SolutionsSME

ValidationFuture State

VSMFMEA

Hypothesis Testing

Pilot Testing

FS1Auto-scheduler for emails, data

extraction✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

FS2Data collation and cleaning using

advanced VBA macro✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

FS7New reporting template using

advanced graphics and navigation✓ ✓ ✓

FS9Remove people dependency by

cross-training all the users✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

FS11

Governance framework to track

the changes in the process to

ensure its incorporation in the SOP

✓ ✓ ✓




3.2.3. 2 – What evidence showed that validation was performed prior to implementation?

Attribute Agreement Analysis Future State Value Stream Map


21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Perc

ent

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Perc

ent

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:



MO NTH

Q UA RTER

Jul

Jun

May

Apr

Mar

FebJa

nDec

NovO

ctSep

AugJu

lJu

nM

ayApr

Mar

Feb

Jan

Dec

Nov

Oct

Sep

AugJu

lJu

nMay

Apr

Q3-17

Q2-

17

Q2-1

7

Q2-1

7

Q1-17

Q1-1

7

Q1-1

7

Q4-16

Q4-

16

Q4-1

6

Q3-16

Q3-

16

Q3-1

6

Q2-1

6

Q2-16

Q2-1

6

Q1-1

6

Q1-16

Q1-

16

Q4-1

5

Q4-15

Q4-15

Q3-1

5

Q3-1

5

Q3-15

Q2-1

5

Q2-1

5

Q2-15

120

100

80

60

40

20

Ind

ivid

ua

l Va

lue

_X=23.5

Pre-Project During Project P ilot C ontrol Phase

Resource Utilization by Project Phase

~90% 88.4%

24.7% Pilot results showed that the resource

utilization for the month of Jan and

Feb had reduced significantly due to

the automation (~24%)

Resource Utilization Trend


LegendCycle Time and Lead time can be reduced in these process steps

Tool 1

Tool 2

Database 1

Database 2

Tool 3

Data Extraction, Cleansing,

Standardization


Audit

Client

Updates

Client’s Server

I I

C/T – 0 min

0 min

C/T – 207 min

200 min

C/T – 160 min

200 min

C/T – 87 min

100 min



End to end Reporting and Insight Generation Time including the idle time per Week· Per week – 1298 min (approximately 16 hours)· Per Quarter – Approximately 200 hours· Resource Utilization ~ 22% - 25%



Improvisation

25


3.2.4. 1 – What additional potential benefits were anticipated from the final solutions? 3.2.4. 2 – Were the additional benefits anticipated prior to implementation?

FS1, FS2Improvement in

efficiency & accuracy

Helped client to meet their strategic

objectives

FS7Improved

visualization and easy navigation

Eliminated audit and reduced clarification calls from the client

FS9Reduced rework and resource dependency

Employee satisfaction

FS11Process control and

governanceMet the strategic goals

of the process

Additional Benefits

1. We were able to cater to the

additional reports along with the

day-to-day activities

2. We experienced reduced resource

utilization

3. We experienced improved client

perception




3.2.5. 1 (1/3) – What data was generated and analyzed to justify implementation?3.2.5. 2 (1/3) – What evidence showed that justification was performed prior to implementation?

Manual Extraction of

data

Manual Data Collation & Cleansing

Manual Data Standardization

Manual AuditingManual Reporting,

Insights and Mailing

Multiple Data SourceseClerx Specialist Team

Automated Extraction of data

Automated Data Collation, Cleansing,

Standardization, Visualization and Report

Creation

Insights and Updates

Multiple Data SourceseClerx Specialist Team



Client

Client

26




Automation and

improvements in the below

steps improved efficiency

and quality of reports and

eliminated dependency on

the skilled resources

▪ Data Extraction

▪ Data Consolidation

▪ Data Cleansing

▪ Data Standardization

▪ Report Making

▪ Mailing reports to the client


Future State VSM

LegendCycle Time and Lead time can be reduced in these process steps

Tool 1

Tool 2

Database 1

Database 2

Tool 3


Standardization


Audit

Client

Updates

Client’s Server

I I

C/T – 0 min

0 min

C/T – 207 min

200 min

C/T – 160 min

200 min

C/T – 87 min

100 min






Improvisation






MO NTH

Q UA RTER

JulJunMay

A prM arF ebJanDec

NovO ctSep

A ugJulJunMayA pr

MarFebJanDecNov

O ctSepA ugJul

JunMayA pr

Q 3-17

Q 2-17

Q2-17Q2-17

Q 1-17

Q 1-17Q1-17

Q 4-16

Q 4-16

Q4-16Q 3-1

6Q 3-1

6Q 3-16

Q2-16Q 2-1

6Q 2-16

Q1-16Q 1-1

6Q 1-1

6Q4-15

Q 4-15

Q 4-15

Q 3-15Q3-15

Q 3-15

Q 2-15Q2-15

Q 2-15

120

100

80

60

40

20

Indiv

idual

Value

_X=23.5

Pre-Project During Project P ilot C ontrol Phase


~90% 88.4%

24.7%

27



AAA Test of the resources – Before Improvement AAA test of the resources – After Improvement

Attribute Agreement Test Results


21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:



21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:






3.3.1. 1 – How was the correctness of the initial or updated project scope, deliverables and timing confirmed?

Project

deliverables

completed as per

planned dates

Tollgate

Review + email

Sign-off

Six Sigma

Steering

Committee

Quality

Team

Project

Team

Technical

Team

Addition in Scope: Technical Team On-boarded

Process

Owners


28


3.3.1. 2 – How were the stakeholders involved and communicated with during the solution phase of the project?

Stakeholders How they were Involved

Project Steering

Committee

▪ Reviewed progress of the team

▪ Provided support by getting technical team onboard

Process Owners

▪ In bringing up solutions and ideas during Brainstorming, Affinity

diagram, Team Leads and Process Managers in Multi-voting,

Payoff Matrix, Pilot tests

▪ Coordinating in the Solution Generation phase, Conducting and

analyzing VSM, Analysis of Pilot test results

Quality Team

▪ Conducted Quality-specific trainings

▪ Facilitated team on the use of Quality tools / methods

▪ Administered DMAIC phase implementation

Knowledge

Management Team

▪ Assisted with Training Need Analysis and Team Competency

Mapping review

▪ Updated project documents

Technical Team▪ Provided technical guidance on process automation

▪ Supported in pilot-testing of automation

How they Communicated

BY WHEN

Steering Committee

MeetingsMonthly

Tollgate Meetings After each phase of DMAIC

Team Connect Weekly

Email CommunicationBased on project finding

and validation




3.3.1. 3 – What stakeholder resistance was identified / addressed in this phase of the project?


Stakeholder Group What Resistance? How was it Identified? How was it Resolved?

Project Steering Committee No Resistance - -

Process Owners No Resistance - -

Quality Team No Resistance - -

Knowledge Management Team No Resistance - -

Client SPOCResistance to accept

automated reports

One of the project

update meetings

Explained the benefits

of automation

29


3.3.1. 4 – How was the appropriateness of the initial or updated team membership and management routines confirmed (or, what changes were made)?


▪ Project deadlines achieved as planned

Technical team added to

project scope

▪ Routine checks done on planned dates v/s actual implementation dates

▪ KM team audited availability of required documentation

▪ Feedback and support received from Sponsor / Champion

▪ Minutes of meeting published after each meeting

▪ Received email sign-off on phase completion

▪ Routines administered and approved by MBB and BB

No Changes

Team Membership and Management Routines How did we confirm Appropriateness? What changes were made?

Initial Team Membership

Management Routines



Implementation and Results Verification

4

30


4.1.0 | Stakeholder Considerations in Implementation

4.1.1. 1 – How were stakeholders involved in planning the solution / improvement implementation? 4.1.1. 2 – How were stakeholders involved in implementing the solution / improvement?

Sr. No. Stakeholders Contribution in Planning Solution Contribution in Implementing Solution

1.

Project

Steering

Committee

Sponsor: Ensured availability of all resources on scheduled

meeting dates

Champion: Liaised with client SPOC to get required

accesses and approvals

Sponsor / Champion: Acted as change agents to make the improvements a part

of

the process

2. Project Team

Project Lead ensured required stakeholder’s presence

while planning the solutions

Process SMEs contributed with their knowledge and

experience on planning solutions

Project Lead: Took the onus of training the entire team on the new procedures

Process SMEs built new process flows for the revised procedures

2. Quality TeamEnsured team readiness for usage of various Quality tools

Facilitated solution planning sessionsHelped with statistical validation and justification of implemented solutions

3. Technical Team

Helped with identifying the areas in the process that can

be automated

Helped in troubleshooting various automation options

Built the automation for the process

Technical team helped fix bugs that were identified in the pilot phase

They also supported the team with initial training on using the new automation

4.

Knowledge

Management

Team

Helped in creating training need analysis based on

proposed solutions

▪ Worked with the Project Lead and SMEs in updating the Standard Operating

Procedures, Process Checklists, Process Training Plans and assessments

▪ Carried refresher trainings and conducted post training assessments for the

process team

6. Client SPOC NASupported us by providing required backend accesses to the tools used in the

process for automation

4.0.0: IMPLEMENTATION AND RESULTS VERIFICATION


4.1.2. 1 – What was done to anticipate resistance before it occurred?

▪ Tollgate reviews were

conducted with the project

Sponsor / Champion and the

Master Black Belt after

completion of each phase

▪ Stakeholder’s concerns were

thoroughly discussed

during reviews

Tollgate Reviews


was conducted

▪ For each stakeholder, we

tried to anticipate where and

what phases of the project

could be resisted

Stakeholder Analysis

▪ Email sign-offs were

taken from stakeholders for

each important decision

taken in the project. This

was also followed for tollgate

reviews and solution

implementation plan

Email Sign-offs for Each Phase



31


4.1.2. 2 – What types of resistance were actually encountered during the course of solution / improvement implementation? 4.1.2. 3 – How was the actual resistance identified?

4.1.2 C: How was it identified?4.1.2 B: What resistance?

▪ Identified during solution discussion with

client and technical team

▪ Delayed email sign-off from process

owners

▪ Low attendance in new process trainings

▪ Client – Resistance to provide continued

backend access to a certain database

▪ Knowledge Management - No

Resistance

▪ Process Team – Resistance to follow new

process / resistance to change management

▪ Project Steering Committee - No

Resistance



NA

NA


4.1.3. 1 – How was the actual resistance addressed? 4.1.3. 2 – How did the team know it was successful in addressing the resistance?

▪ Project team conducted 1X1 discussions

with all team members

▪ Shared pilot results with the team which

clearly showed the project benefits

▪ Project Champion motivated the team to

go ahead with changes

▪ Sponsor / Champion intervention

▪ Multiple meetings with client to explain

the benefits of automation

▪ Received approval from Senior Marketing

Management

▪ Process team supported end-to-end

implementation of changes once the

initial resistance issues were sorted

4.1.2 2: What resistance? 4.1.3 1: How was it addressed? 4.1.3 2: Success confirmed?

Team Resistance

Client SPOC Resistance



32


21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

95

90

85

80

75

70

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:



21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

21

100

90

80

70

60

50

Appraiser

Pe

rce

nt

95.0% C I

Percent

Date of study:

Reported by:

Name of product:

Misc:



4.1.4. 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?

AAA Test of the resources –

Before Improvement

AAA test of the resources –

After Improvement


Sign-off from Senior Marketing Management

(Client) over conference call and mail

Sign-off from the Project Steering Committee

post improvement seen in audit results and

addressing the process issues



4.2.0 | Solution / Improvement Implementation

4.2.1. 1 – What processes or systems were changed or created to implement the solution / improvement?

Automated report making process


Saved time for Insight generation

LegendCycle Time and Lead time reduced in these process steps

Tool 1

Tool 2

Database 1

Database 2

Tool 3


Standardization


Audit

Client

Updates

Client’s Server

I I

C/T – 0 min

0 min

C/T – 207 min

200 min

C/T – 160 min

200 min

C/T – 87 min

100 min






Improvisation

33


4.2.1. 2 – What systems were changed or created to measure and manage the performance of the implementation?

4.2.0 | Solution / Improvement Implementation

System Changes

Centralized Repository

(SharePoint)

Macro Governance Framework

Control Plan

Macro files to be saved on the centralized shared location so

that the team can access it and run the report

Approval process in place for version control of the VBA macro

Manual execution of the report every month to ensure

sustainability incase of automation failure



4.3.0 | Project Results

4.3.1. 1 – What were the results? 4.3.1. 1 – How did the results compare to the specific project goals / measures fromitem 2.1.1? 4.3.2. 1 – What additional benefits were realized from the project?

Pre - Project TargetWhat were the results? Achieved

Maintenance activity of the reports

~900 man hours ~50% improvement~700 man hours reduction

(78% reduction)

OFEs~76000 OFREs 100% reduction 100% OFREs eliminated

Additional Benefits

~90% -~75% reduction in the

Resource Utilization

Avg. maintenance time on the reports per Quarter

Opportunities for Referencing Errors

Avg. Resource Utilization per Quarter

34


4.3.2. 2 – How did the team measure any of the additional benefits that were soft?

Simplified process helped

reduce people dependency

Employee Satisfaction

Improved Client’s perception

Strengthened client

relationship

Employee

feedback

Client

feedback

Employee

feedback

Additional

value-add

projects




4.3.2. 3 – How do the actual additional benefits that were realized compare to the expected additional benefits identified in item 3.2.4?

Reduction in the maintenance activity of the reports ~900 man hours

Elimination of Opportunities of Errors ~76000 OFEs

Expected Actual Realized

~450 man hours

100%

~700 man hours

100%

Project Benefits


35


Sustaining and Communicating Results

5


5.1.0 | Sustaining Results Over Time

5.1.1. 1 – What was done to make sure the process or system changes made during the implementation (4.2.1.) continued to be followed?

System Changes Sustenance Plan

Monitoring and Response Plan

Change Management

Refresher Process Training

Fortnightly Audits

Process Checklists

Responsibility

Project Lead

Process Owner

(Manager)

Knowledge

Management

Project Lead /

Black belt

Process Owner

(Manager)

What was Done?The project metric was measured and

monitored regularly to track and respond to

any situation causing process service delivery

related issues

The Process Manager regularly addressed

issues related to the change in the process

to ensure adherence

Knowledge Management team conducted

process knowledge tests as per the ops

requirements

Fortnightly audits of the process were done to

ensure conformance to the new process

Process Audit checklists were simplified

and updated on the centralized repository

for the team to refer to

5.0.0: SUSTAINING AND COMMUNICATING RESULTS

36


5.1.1. 2 – What evidence showed that this became part of the organizations culture / operating strategy?



Monitoring and Response Plan Change Management Macro Governance Model


5.1.2. 1 – What was done to make sure the benefits obtained from the implementation (Item 4.2.1.) will be maintained?

The SOP was updated with the latest changes and was saved on a SharePoint Document Library which made it easier for the process team to access.

Version Control to be implementedApproval process in place for change managementFMEA document reviewed at regular intervals

This plan basically assesses team’s current skill and process knowledge to required skills / knowledge. Based on the assessment, every team member is rated as N,B,I or E

Macro files to be saved at an eClerx shared location. Anybody from the team can access it and run the report

Manual execution of report every monthTo be updated with manual steps to make a report for a contingency situation

Standard Operating Procedure

Risk of Process Change

Refresher’s Training

Centralized Storage of Macro

Dealing with Technology Failure



To communicate the process performance in a clear and concise manner to the process owners

Visual Management System

37


5.1.2. 2 – What evidence showed that this became part of the organizations culture/operating strategy?


Centralized Storage for Documents, SOP, FMEA, Macro, etc… Training Plan



5.2.0 | Communication of Results

5.2.1 2 (1/2) – How did the team communicate the results to the various stakeholder groups?

Project Steering Committee

Client SPOC

Process Owners

▪ Project Review Meeting

▪ Project closure email

▪ Tollgate sign-off

▪ Project closure email

▪ Quarterly Business Review

Meet

▪ Formal project presentation by

Project Lead

▪ New process walkthrough

sessions


38


Thank You