Bonacorsi Consulting Analyze Master Template (09!27!07)

Program Name
Lean Six Sigma
<Project Title
(State From ... To)>
< Last Name, First Name >
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
Wave No: <xx>
Review Date: <xx/xx/xxxx>
LEAN
SIX SIGMA
Program Name
Lean Six Sigma
LEAN
SIX SIGMA
Analyze Phase Road Map
Analyze
Activities Tools
• Identify Potential Root Causes • Process Constraint ID and Takt Time
Analysis
• Reduce 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 Analyze Gate
• ANOVA
• Components of Variation
• Conquering Product and Process
Complexity
• Queuing Theory
Bonacorsi Consulting 3
Analyze
Measure Overview
Process Capability Graphical Analysis
I -M R C h a r t o f D e l i v e r y T i m e
CTQ: ? 40
U C L= 3 7 . 7 0
Unit (d) or Mean (c): ?
Individual Value
35
Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? 30 _

X= 2 9 .1 3
DPMO (d): ? 25
20 LC L= 2 0 . 5 6
1 28 55 82 109 136 163 190 217 244
Sigma (Short Term): ?

O b s e r v a tio n

U C L= 1 0 . 5 3
Sigma (Long Term):?

1 0 .0

M oving Range
7 .5
5 .0
MSA Results: show the percentage result of the 2 .5
__
M R = 3 .2 2
GR&R, AR&R or other measurement systems analysis 0 .0 LC L= 0
carried out in the project 1 28 55 82 109 136

O b s e r v a tio n
163 190 217 244
Root Cause / Quick Win Tools Used

Root cause: Detailed process mapping Time Series Plot
Measurement Systems Analysis Probability Plot
Quick Win #1
Value Stream Mapping Pareto Analysis
Root cause: Data Collection Planning Operational
Quick Win #2 Basic Statistics Definitions
Process Capability 5s
Root cause: Pull
Histograms
Quick Win #3 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)
Investigation Statistical / Graphical Analysis Observations/Conclusion
What is the shape of the Project Y Histogram
data? Is the Y data normally
distributed? What is the normality
test p-value? Normality Test
What is the central tendency of the

Mean, Median, or Quartile Values
Project Y data?
What is the spread of the Project Y Standard Deviation, Span, or
data? Stability Factor
Is the data stable over time? Run Chart
Describe any other observations about the Project Y data

Include any other findings regarding the data here
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
5% 5% Man
32% 5%
Machine
< Insert your variation
percentage as shown Method
in pie chart > Measurement
42% Mother Nature
11%
Machine
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
3 = moderate correlation
9 = strong correlation 10 7 6 7 10 9 5 7
Importance done by Kano analysis?
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
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 knowledge
Interview Customer to
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

11 Fill out Forms 9 3 108
12 Accept Form 3 3 51
What is the % of quick hits
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. There is
process that is
no Oscillation
creating clustering

Pareto Plot
Analyze
100
150
80
Percent
100 60
Count
40
50
20
0 0
ut h th t rs
Defect So No
r
Ea
s he
Ot
Count 100 50 15 6
P ercent 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”
F i tt e d L i n e P l o t
W a it T im e = 3 2 .0 5 + 0 .5 8 2 5 D e live r ie s
55
S 1 .1 1 8 8 5
R-Sq 9 4 .1 %
R - S q ( a d j) 9 3 .9 %
50
Wait Time
45
40
35
10 15 20 25 30 35
D e liv e r ie s
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 different
0 10 20 30 40 50 from the Target Mean mean of
Improve Data 30 minutes?
The test statistic, T, for Ho: mean = 30 is

calculated as –0.84. The P-Value of this test, or One-Sample T: Improve Data
the probability of obtaining more extreme value Test of mu = 30 vs mu not = 30
of the test statistic by chance if the null
Variable N Mean StDev SE Mean
hypothesis was true, is 0.410 (> 0.05). This is
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 Variances for Total Time

Test for Equal
95% Confidence Intervals for Sigmas Factor Levels Variance Confirms
Antenna Payroll Input Type
Cycle Time is
Payroll Significant
0 50 100 150
F-Test Levene's Test

Test Statistic: 0.108 Test Statistic: 21.054
P-Value : 0.001 P-Value : 0.000
The spread of the

Boxplots of Raw Data
data is statistical
greater for
Antenna
completing the
payroll form than
Payroll the Antenna time
tracking.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
T otal T ime

Analyze
One Way ANOVA
After further investigation, possible 150 Boxplot: Part/ No
reasons proposed by the team are Part Impact on
supplier backorders, lack of
Net Hours Call Open

Ticket Cycle Time
technician certifications and the
100
distance from the supplier to the
client site.
It is also caused by the need for 50
technicians to make a second visit
to the end user to complete the
part replacement. Next step will be
0
for the team to confirm these
suspected root causes. Part/No Part
No Part
Part
Analysis of Variance for Net Hour
Source DF SS MS F P Because the p-value
<= 0.05, we can be
Part/No 1 7421 7421 8.65 0.004
Error 69 59194 858
Total 70 66615 confident that calls
Individual 95% CI's For Mean
Level N Mean StDev --+---------+---------+---------+---- requiring parts do
No Part
Part
27
44
21.99
43.05
19.95
33.70
(--------*---------)
(------*------)
have an impact on
--+---------+---------+---------+---- the ticket cycle time.
Pooled StDev = 29.29 12 24 36 48

Analyze
Mood’s Median
After further investigation, possible 40 Dotplots
Dot Plot:of Defects
Part/ by Impact
No Part Subgroup
on
reasons proposed by the team are Ticket Cycle Time
supplier backorders, lack of
30
technician certifications and the
distance from the supplier to the
Defects
client site. 20
It is also caused by the need for

technicians to make a second visit 10
to the end user to complete the
part replacement. Next step will be
for the team to confirm these 0
suspected root causes. Subgroup
After
Before
Chi-Square = 19.14 DF = 2 Mood’s Median Test
P = 0.000 Individual 95.0% Confidence Interval’s Because the p-value
Month N<= N> Median Q3-Q1 ------+---------+---------+---------+ <= 0.05, we can be
10 88 132 8.43 12.15 (--------+-------) confident that calls
11 123 121 6.57 10.52 (------+------)
requiring parts do
12 111 68 4.77 7.10 (-----+------)
------+---------+---------+---------+ have an impact on
Overall Median 6.63 4.8 6.4 8.0 9.6 the ticket cycle time.

Analyze
Statistical Testing for Discrete 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
Errors Correct Total
1 33 60 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
107.03 138.97
reduces the chances that an error will
4 32 132 164
71.35 92.65
be made. Also, in Department 4 the
customer name, address and ticket
5 168 136 304
132.26 171.74 number are added directly from the
Total 392 509 901 contracts system without human
intervention, reducing the possibility that
Chi-Sq = 1.376 + 1.060 +
4.722 + 3.637 + a typo or other error type could occur
5.827 + 4.487 +
21.703 + 16.714 + that will need to be corrected later
9.657
DF = 4, P-Value
+ 7.437 = 76.620
= 0.000
(taking more time)

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
Value Add Analysis - Current State
--
Takt Time = Net Process Time Available Takt Tim e = 55
80 Number of Units to Process
Task Time (seconds)
70
60
50 --
40
30
20
10
0 ---
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Task #
CVA Time BVA Time NVA Time
Hypothesis Test Summary
Analyze
Hypothesis Test Factor (x) Was the hypothesis roadmap

(ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t - test, Chi Squared, p Value Observations/Conclusion followed?
Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc) Tested
Significant factor - 1 hour driving time from DC <Right Click, and select Add Text>
Example: ANOVA Location 0.030 to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to
generally be longer for the Baltimore site
What was the power and
Significant factor - on average, calls requiring
Sample Size?
Example: ANOVA Part vs. No Part 0.004 parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43
hours)
Significant factor - Department 4 has digitized
Example: Chi Squared Department 0.000 addition of customer info to ticket and less
human intervention, resulting in fewer errors
South region accounted for 59% of the defects
Example: Pareto Region n/a due to their manual process and distance from What are α and β risks?
the parts warehouse
Describe any other observations about the root cause (x) data <Right Click, and select Add Text>
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
? ? ?
In/Out of Frame
Analyze
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

Analyze
Systems & Structures 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
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
Lean Six Sigma Project Status and Planning W/E:
Key actions Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week Comments
completed
Issues
Upcoming Deliverables/Tasks - 2 weeks out Due Revised Due Comments
Lessons learned
Communications,
team building, For deliverables due thru:
organizational Deliverable/Action
Actions Scheduled for next 2 Weeks
Who Due Revised Due Comments/Resolution Need Help
activities
Current Issues and Risks

Issue/Risk Who Due Revised Due Recommended Action Need Help
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 Stop
Has the team identified the key
factors (critical X’s) that have
the biggest impact on process Analyze
Tollgate Checklist Tollgate Review 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?
Sign Off
Analyze
• 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 Enter Name Here Deployment Champion
Enter Name Here Sponsor / Process Owner Enter Name Here

Financial Representative 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.
© 2006 by Bonacorsi Consulting, L.L.C. All Rights Reserved.

Steven Bonacorsi is a Senior Master Black
Belt instructor and coach. Steven Bonacorsi
has trained 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.

Bonacorsi Consulting Analyze Master Template (09!27!07)

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Bonacorsi Consulting Analyze Master Template (09!27!07)

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Program Name

Lean Six Sigma

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

 Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? 30 _

Sigma (Short Term): ?

Sigma (Long Term):?

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

carried out in the project 1 28 55 82 109 136

Root Cause / Quick Win Tools Used

What is the central tendency of the

Describe any other observations about the Project Y data

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

Was the Action workout

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

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 Variances for Total Time

F-Test Levene's Test

The spread of the

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Net Hours Call Open

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

 It is also caused by the need for

suspected root causes. Subgroup

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

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

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

CVA Time BVA Time NVA Time

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Hypothesis Test Factor (x) Was the hypothesis roadmap

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Creating a visual depiction of what

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

 Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.

 Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

 Key actions Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week Comments

Current Issues and Risks

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here

• I concur that the Analyze phase was successfully completed on MM/DD/YYYY

Enter Name Here Enter Name Here

Enter Name Here Sponsor / Process Owner Enter Name Here

Defect (d) or St. Dev. (c): ? 30 _

It is also caused by the need for

Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.

Show the financial calculation savings and assumptions used.

Key actions Deliverables/Tasks Completed last week Comments