Customer?...A little more detail

[rderoeck@alphaind.com]

The XYZ Associates' report was presented to our upper
management in Dec-96. The "management edict" was
communicated at the end of our fiscal year (Mar-97),
therefore it was in Apr-97 that we began tracking on-time
shipments for the entire company. Individual process 
behavior charts (used to track 8 different product lines) 
were introduced in Aug-97, along with monthly meetings to
review delivery performance. The individual product line
charts helped us to identify potential signals that might get
buried in the company-wide (aggregate) chart.

I set up "preliminary" process limits using data from Apr-97
to Nov-97. In Dec-97, a strong signal shows up on both 
the X and mR charts indicating a shift in the process mean.
I then used the next 4 months (Dec-97 to Mar-98) to set
new process limits (only 3 moving ranges!). In Apr-98, 
another shift in the process mean shows up on the X-chart
(new limits calculated from Apr-98 to Nov-98). The last 
(so far) signal is a weak but sustained one (7 points above 
the process centerline) on the X-chart. Most of the 
improvements do indeed show up as a step function. Some
may be due to a simplification of process steps (flowcharts
were used) but I cannot be sure that this was the special
cause. The overall improvements may have occurred 
because we were focusing and measuring on-time 
deliveries instead of trying to "make the number". The
communication meeting (Mar-97) set the priority/
measurement for the company. The improvement cycle
(PDSA) began in Aug-97 with individual process behavior
charts and monthly meetings. 

Robert brings up the important issue of suboptimization.
Fortunately, we had already established numerous internal
measures (yields, cycletimes, leadtimes, delinquient
 backlog) all using process behavior charts which provided
a balance approach (I had never though of the invoice
process!). 

IMO, the main driver for improving on-time shipments was
the Operations Managers' committment to this process. He
lead the improvement effort by keeping us focused on our
goal through data analysis and effective communication.
He was also willing to LISTEN to BAD news (previous
management was not) and took action. He was recently
promoted to Executive Vice President. Good management
reminds me of Harry Truman's comment about generals,
"When you find a good one, hold on to him". He was
referring to General Marshall who worked for Truman as
Sec. of Defense and Sec. of State after he retired? from the army. 

Although this real-life example is far from ideal (some
product lines needed their xxx kicked in the beginning) it
does show that "dis stuff" works.

Here to Learn
Rich DeRoeck 
Message posting through the Clemson CQI Web Server.
======================================================================