Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase Tollgate Template

Program Nam
Lean Six Sigm
<Project Title
(State From ... To)>
< Last Name, First Name >
DefineMeasure
AnalyzeImproveControl
Wave No: <xx>
Review Date: <xx/xx/xxxx>
LEAN
SIX SIGMA
Program Nam
Lean Six Sigm
DefineMeasure
AnalyzeImproveControl
LEAN
SIX SIGMA
Analyze
Analyze Phase Road Map
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
Activities Tools
• Identify Potential Root Causes • Process Constraint ID and Takt Time
• Reduce
Analysis
List of Potential Root Causes
• Cause & Effect Analysis
• Confirm Root Cause to Output Relationship
• FMEA
• Estimate Impact of Root Causes on Key
Outputs • Hypothesis Tests/Conf. Intervals
• Prioritize Root Causes • Simple & Multiple Regression
• Complete • ANOVA
Analyze Gate
• Components of Variation
• Conquering Product and Process
Complexity
• Queuing Theory
Bonacorsi Consulting 3
Analyze
Measure Overview
Process Capability Graphical Analysis
I -MR Chart of Delivery Time
 CTQ: ? 40
UC L=37.70
 Unit (d) or Mean (c): ?
Individual Value
35
 Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? 30 _

X=29.13
DPMO (d): ? 25

20 LC L=20.56
1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244
Observation
 Sigma (Short Term): ?
UC L=10.53
10.0
 Sigma (Long Term):?
Moving Range
7.5
5.0
 MSA Results: show the percentage result of the 2.5
__
MR=3.22
GR&R, AR&R or other measurement systems 0.0 LC L=0
analysis carried out in the project 1 28 55 82 109 136

Observation
163 190 217 244
Root Cause / Quick Win Tools Used

 Root cause:  Detailed process mapping  Time Series Plot
 Measurement Systems  Probability Plot
 Quick Win #1
Analysis  Pareto Analysis
 Root cause:  Value Stream Mapping  Operational
 Data Collection Planning Definitions
 Quick Win #2
 Basic Statistics  5s
 Root cause:  Process Capability  Pull
 Quick Win #3  Histograms  Control Charts
Analyze
Graphical Analysis Summary
Data is Continuous: ?? Data Points Collected Between XX/XX/XX and XX/XX/XX
Normality Central Tendency Variation
Normal Average Std. Dev (long term)
Non-Normal Median or Q1 or Q3 Span (1/99) or
Stability Factor (Q1/Q3)
Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Analyze
TPC Analysis
Technical-Political-Cultural (TPC) Analysis
Sources Of Resistance Definition Causes Of Resistance Rating Examples
Technical
Political
Cultural
Analyze
Sources of Variation
Defect Overproduction Transportation
Was the Action workout
Area 1 performed #1?
<Area 1> Area 1
Sub area 1
<Sub area 1> Sub area 1 <Right Click, and select Add Text>
NVA
Area 1
Area 1 Was the Action workout
Area 1
Sub area 1 performed #2?
Sub area 1 Sub area 1
<Right Click, and select Add Text>
Processing Motion Inventory Waiting
< Insert your variation
percentage as shown
in pie chart >
Analyze
Cause and Effect Matrix
Importance Rating Score Speed to Decision Cooperation, Budget Funding
Seats Schedule Process
Blank = no correlation Reach Meets Clarity, Feedback for Source
Available Options Outputs
1 = remote correlation Decision Req Accuracy Options Identified Was the rating of importance
done by Kano analysis?
3 = moderate correlation
Importance
9 = strong correlation 10 7 6 7 10 9 5 7
Rating
Item Process Step Process Inputs Correlation of Input to Output Total
To what extent does variability in these process steps/inputs impact variability across these outputs ? Higher score =
Develop Options <Right Click, and select Add Text>
Customer schedule &
16 including price & 9 9 1 9 9 9 9 3 459
requirements
schedule
18 Approve options Proper decision makers 9 9 9 9 3 1 9 392
15
Inventory Search of Database, tribal
9 9 9 3 261
Were all the process steps
known Vacant Space
Interview Customer to
knowledge
identified?
14 Form 3 1 9 9 9 217
Understand Form
Brief customer on options, costs, schedule
17 9 9 3 3 3 216
options options, funding vehicle <Right Click, and select Add Text>
8 Supervisor Approval 9 3 1 118
7 Peer Review Approval 9 3 111
What is the % of quick hits
11 Fill out Forms 9 3 108
12 Accept Form 3 3 51
3 Create Spreadsheet 3 30 causing the problem?
4 Dept Approval 3 30
5 Approval Mgr 1 3 30
6 Approval Mgr 2 3 30
1 Identify Need 3 21
13 Assign to Team 3 21
2 Mark Up Floor Plan 0
9 Notification 0
Forms to requestor
19 0
and Log in issue
19 Prepare brief 0
Analyze
Run Charts
When the points are
connected with a line,
a run ends when the A run, in this case,
line crosses the is one or more
median consecutive points
on the same side
of the median
Median = 38
1 Run about the

Median, can you
Longest Run count the other 8?
about the
median
There is a no non-
random influence
acting upon this
process. There is
no trend
There is a non- There is a no non-

random influence
random influence
acting upon this
acting upon this
process that is process. There is
no Oscillation
creating clustering

Analyze
Pareto Plot Pareto Chart
100
150
80
Percent
100 60
Count
40
50
20
0 0
th th t rs
Defect So
u
No
r
Ea
s
Ot
he
Count 100 50 15 6
Percent 58.5 29.2 8.8 3.5
Cum % 58.5 87.7 96.5 100.0
Analyze
Scatter Plot
Average Expenses decrease

as Sales Increase
Analyze
Linear Regression
 95% confident that 94.1% of the variation in “Wait Time” is from the “Qty
of Deliveries”
Fitted Line Plot

Wait Time = 32.05 + 0.5825 Deliveries
55
S 1.11885
R-Sq 94.1%
R-Sq(adj) 93.9%
50
Wait Time
45
40
35
10 15 20 25 30 35
Deliveries
One-Sample T-Test and Dot Plot
Analyze
Dotplot of Improve Data This Dot Plot graphically displays 95%

(with Ho and 95% t-confidence interval for the mean) confidence intervals that the data will
fall between 23.45 and 32.75 for
response time (see the red brackets
and red line). It also indicates that the
[ _ ] Mean (Red X) is at 28.1. The blue Ho
X Ho marks the Target Mean.
We Are 95% Confident The Improve
Mean Is Not Statistically Different Hypothesis Test: Is the
Improve data set mean
0 10 20 30 40 50 different from the Target Mean
Improve Data mean of 30 minutes?
The test statistic, T, for Ho: mean = 30 is

calculated as –0.84. The P-Value of this test, One-Sample T: Improve Data
or the probability of obtaining more extreme Test of mu = 30 vs mu not = 30
value of the test statistic by chance if the null
hypothesis was true, is 0.410 (> 0.05). This is Variable N Mean StDev SE Mean
called the attained significant level, or P-Value. Improve Data 30 28.10 12.45 2.27
Therefore, Accept Ho, which means we
conclude that the Improve data set mean (28.1) Variable 95.0% CI T P
is NOT different than the Target mean (30). Improve Data (23.45, 32.75) -0.84 0.410

Test for Equal Variance Analyze
Test for Equal

Variance Confirms
Payroll Input Type
Cycle Time is
Significant
The spread of the

data is statistical
greater for
completing the
payroll form than
the Antenna time
tracking.

Boxplots of Net Hour by Part/No Analyze
One Way ANOVA (means are indicated by solid circles)
 After further investigation, 150 Boxplot: Part/ No

possible reasons proposed by Part Impact on
Net Hours Call Open

the team are supplier Ticket Cycle Time
backorders, lack of technician
100
certifications and the distance
from the supplier to the client
site.
50
 It is also caused by the need
for technicians to make a
second visit to the end user to
0
complete the part
replacement. Next step will be Part/No Part
No Part
Part
for the team
Analysis to confirm
of Variance for Netthese
Hour
suspectedDFroot causes.
Source SS MS F P  Because the p-
Part/No 1 7421 7421 8.65 0.004
Error 69 59194 858 value <= 0.05, we
Total 70 66615 can be confident
Individual 95% CI's For Mean
Level N Mean StDev --+---------+---------+---------+---- that calls requiring
No Part 27 21.99 19.95 (--------*---------) parts do have an
Part 44 43.05 33.70 (------*------)
--+---------+---------+---------+---- impact on the
Pooled StDev = 29.29 12 24 36 48
ticket cycle time.
Analyze
Mood’s Median
 After further investigation, 40 Dotplots
Dot Plot:of Defects
Part/ by Impact
No Part Subgroup
on
possible reasons proposed by Ticket Cycle Time
the team are supplier
30
backorders, lack of technician
certifications and the distance
Defects
from the supplier to the client 20
site.
 It is also caused by the need 10
for technicians to make a
second visit to the end user to
complete the part 0
replacement. Next step will be Subgroup
After
Before
for the team to confirm these
suspected root causes.
Chi-Square = 19.14 DF = 2 Mood’s Median Test
P = 0.000 Individual 95.0% Confidence Interval’s Because the p-
Month N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 ------+---------+---------+---------+ value <= 0.05, we
10 88 132 8.43 12.15 (--------+-------) can be confident
11 123 121 6.57 10.52 (------+------) that calls requiring
12 111 68 4.77 7.10 (-----+------)
parts do have an
------+---------+---------+---------+
Overall Median 6.63 4.8 6.4 8.0 9.6 impact on the
ticket cycle time.
Statistical Testing for Discrete Analyze
Data
Chi-Square Test
Because this p value is less than 5%
Expected counts (calculated by Minitab) (0.05), we can be confident that
are printed below observed counts
department does have an impact on the
1
Errors
33
Correct
60
Total
93
proportion of correct tickets processed
40.46 52.54
2 27 67 94 This is due to the fact that Department 4

40.90 53.10
has fewer people who need to add
3 132 114 246 information to each ticket, which reduces
107.03 138.97
the chances that an error will be made.
4 32
71.35
132
92.65
164
Also, in Department 4 the customer
name, address and ticket number are
5 168 136 304
132.26 171.74 added directly from the contracts system
Total 392 509 901
without human intervention, reducing the
possibility that a typo or other error type
Chi-Sq = 1.376 + 1.060 +
4.722 + 3.637 + could occur that will need to be
5.827
21.703
+ 4.487 +
+ 16.714 +
corrected later (taking more time)
9.657 + 7.437 = 76.620
DF = 4, P-Value = 0.000

Process Bottleneck Identification & Analyze
Workload Balancing
 Takt Rate Analysis compares the task time of each process (or process
step) to:
 Each other to determine the time trap
 Customer demand to determine if the time trap is the constraint

Takt Time Net
= Process Time Available
Number of Units to Process


Analyze
Hypothesis Test Summary
Was the hypothesis roadmap
followed?
What was the power and
Sample Size?
What are α and β risks?
Analyze
Control / Impact Analysis
Does the X have a high, medium, or low impact on the project Y?
High Impact Medium Impact Low Impact
 ?  ?  ?
influence, or out of their control?
Does the X in he teams control,
In Our  ?  ?  ?
Control  ?  ?  ?
 ?  ?  ?
In Our  ?  ?  ?
Influence  ?  ?  ?
 ?  ?  ?
Out of Our  ?  ?  ?
Control  ?  ?  ?
Analyze
In/Out of Frame
Creating a visual depiction of what
elements of the project are in the scope
(frame) and out of the scope
Vital X #8
Vital X #2
Vital X
Influence
Vital X #5
#3
Vital X #7
No Vital X #4
Control Control
Vital X Vital X #6
#1
Vital X #9

Systems & Structures Analyze
Assessment
System or Structure How should we use or modify to support "____" vision and objectives?
1
Staffing
2
1
Training & Development
2
1
Measurements & Reward
2
1
Communication
2
1
Organization Design
2
1
Information Systems
2
1
Resource Allocation
2

Analyze
Quick Wins
 5s
 4-Step Setup Reduction
 Inventory Reduction
 MSA Improvements
 Price reductions
 Reduced DOWNTIME (Non-value added steps or
work)
 Pull System
 Kaizen events
 Other Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here
Analyze
Business Impact
 State financial impact of project
 Separate “hard or Type 1” from “soft Type 2 or 3” dollars
 State financial impact of future project leverage opportunities
Annual Estimate Replicated Estimate
Revenue • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?
• Type 2: ? • Type 2: ?
Enhancement • Type 3: ? • Type 3: ?
Expenses • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

• Type 2: ? • Type 2: ?
Reduction • Type 3: ? • Type 3: ?
Loss • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

• Type 2: ? • Type 2: ?
Reduction • Type 3: ? • Type 3: ?
Cost • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

• Type 2: ? • Type 2: ?
Avoidance • Type 3: ? • Type 3: ?
Total Savings • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

• Type 2: ? • Type 2: ?
• Type 3: ? • Type 3: ?

Analyze
Business Impact Details
 Type 1: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 1 savings. (tell
the story with cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the
desired financial result (savings) in your project )
 Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.
 Assumption #1 (i.e. source of data, clear Operational Definitions?)
 Assumption #2 (i.e. hourly rate + incremental benefit cost + travel)
 Type 2: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determined the Type 2 savings. (tell
the story with cause–effect relationships, on how the proposed change should create the
desired financial result (savings) in your project )
 Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.
 Assumption #1 (i.e. Labor rate used, period of time, etc…)
 Assumption #2 (i.e. contractor hrs or FTE, source of data, etc…)
 Describe the Type 3 Business Impact(s) areas and how these were measured
 Assumption #1 (i.e. project is driven by the Business strategy?)
 Assumption #2 (i.e. Customer service rating, employee moral, etc…)
 Other Questions
 Stakeholders agree on the project’s impact and how it will be measured in financial terms?
 What steps were taken to ensure the integrity & accuracy of the data?
 Has the project tracking worksheet been updated?

Analyze
Current Status
 Key actions
completed
 Issues
 Lessons
learned
 Communication
s, team
building,
organizational
activities
Analyze
Next Steps
 Key actions
 Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool use
 Questions to answer
 Barrier/risk mitigation activities
Lean Six Sigma Project Issue Log
Last Revised:
Status Revised Due
No. Description/Recommendation Due Date Resp Comments / Resolution
Open/Closed/Hold Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Analyze
Has the team identified the
Stop key factors (critical X’s) that
have the biggest impact on Analyze
Tollgate Checklist Tollgate
Review
process performance?
Have they validated the
root causes?
 Has the team examined the process and identified potential bottlenecks, disconnects and redundancies that could
contribute to the problem statement?
 Has the team analyzed data about the process and its performance to help stratify the problem, understand reasons for
variation in the process, and generate hypothesis as to the root causes of the current process performance?
 Has an evaluation been done to determine whether the problem can be solved without a fundamental ‘white paper’
recreation of the process? Has the decision been confirmed with the Project Sponsor?
 Has the team investigated and validated the root cause hypotheses generated earlier, to gain confidence that the “vital
few” root causes have been uncovered?
 Does the team understand why the problem (the Quality, Cycle Time or Cost Efficiency issue identified in the Problem
Statement) is being seen?
 Has the team been able to identify any additional ‘Quick Wins’?
 Have ‘learning's to-date required modification of the Project Charter? If so, have these changes been approved by the
Project Sponsor and the Key Stakeholders?
 Have any new risks to project success been identified, added to the Risk Mitigation Plan, and a mitigation strategy put
in place?
Analyze
Sign Off
• I concur that the Analyze phase was successfully completed on
MM/DD/YYYY
• I concur the project is ready to proceed to next phase: Improve
Enter Name Here Enter Name Here

Green Belt/Black Belt Deployment Champion
Enter Name Here
Enter Name Here Sponsor / Process Owner
Enter Name
Financial Representative
Here
Master Black Belt
Bonacorsi Consulting
This Training Manual and all materials, procedures and systems herein contained or
depicted (the "Manual"), are the sole and exclusive property of Bonacorsi Consulting,
L.L.C.
The contents hereof contain proprietary trade secrets that are the private and
confidential property of Bonacorsi Consulting. Unauthorized use, disclosure, or
reproduction of any kind of any material contained in this Manual is expressly
prohibited. The contents hereof are to be returned immediately upon termination of any
relationship or agreement giving user authorization to possess or use such information
or materials. Any unauthorized or illegal use shall subject the user to all remedies, both
legal and equitable, available to Bonacorsi Consulting. This Manual may be altered,
amended or supplemented by Bonacorsi Consulting from time to time. In the event of
any inconsistency or conflict between a provision in this Manual and any federal,
provincial, state or local statute, regulation, order or other law, such law will supersede
the conflicting or inconsistent provision(s) of this Manual in all properties subject to that
law. Steven Bonacorsi is a Senior Master
Black Belt instructor and coach.
© 2006 by Bonacorsi Consulting, L.L.C. Steven Bonacorsi
All Rights has trained
Reserved.
hundreds of Master Black Belts, Black
Belts, Green Belts, and Project
Sponsors and Executive Leaders in
Lean Six Sigma DMAIC and Design for
Lean Six Sigma process improvement
methodologies.

Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase Tollgate Template

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lean Six Sigma Analyze Phase Tollgate Template

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Program Nam

Lean Six Sigm

 Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? 30 _

GR&R, AR&R or other measurement systems 0.0 LC L=0

analysis carried out in the project 1 28 55 82 109 136

Root Cause / Quick Win Tools Used

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Sources Of Resistance Definition Causes Of Resistance Rating Examples

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

7 Peer Review Approval 9 3 111

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

1 Run about the

There is a non- There is a no non-

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Average Expenses decrease

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Fitted Line Plot

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Dotplot of Improve Data This Dot Plot graphically displays 95%

The test statistic, T, for Ho: mean = 30 is

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Test for Equal

The spread of the

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

 After further investigation, 150 Boxplot: Part/ No

Net Hours Call Open

replacement. Next step will be Subgroup

2 27 67 94 This is due to the fact that Department 4

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Expenses • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

Loss • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

Cost • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

Total Savings • Type 1: ? • Type 1: ?

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Name Here Enter Name Here

You might also like