Lean Six Sigma

Reducing Missed Garbage Pickups

Dawn Ritchie, Solid Waste Manager

Project Description

Problem
Statement:

Missed garbage pickups result in

increased costs and dissatisfied
customers

Objective:

Decrease missed garbage pickups

by fifty percent

Benefits
Benefits to the City

Improved Customer Service

Enhanced Relationship with Contractor, National Serv-all (NSA)

Potential Savings on Next Contract with Decreased Tonnage Rates

Benefits to the NSA

Improved Customer Service

Decreased Costs
Enhanced Relationship with the City
Improved Driver Training

Potential Productivity Improvement from

Drivers/Collectors

Benefits to the Customer

Improved Pickup Timeliness
Increased Confidence and Satisfaction with Service
Potential Cost Savings on New Contract
Punctual Friday Pickups on New Contract

Project Team
Black Belt:

Dawn Ritchie

Champion:

Ted Rhinehart

Team Members:

Matt Gratz, City Solid Waste

Angela Lewis, NSA
Bob Young, NSA
Mike Welch, NSA

Definition and Costs of the Y

Y=

Validated or Legitimate Missed Garbage

Pickups
Y = f(x1,x2,x3,,xk)

Costs
of Y=

The costs of the Y include

dissatisfaction and inconvenience for
customers and increased costs in fuel
and labor.

Defect Theories
Driver Training - doesnt return to where he
previously stopped
Driver Experience
Route Knowledge -miss entire street/alley
Route Problems
alley on side load route
house in commercial area
customer has no access to the alley

Why Defects?
Environmental Factors
ice/snow/weather
alley cave-in

Obstacles

road or alley closed

alley overgrown with brush
car parked in front of garbage
garbage hidden by bush, fence, garage/bldg

Project Objectives
Special assist pickup
Behavior/attitude of driver

in a hurry
carelessness
goes home early without finishing route
grudge towards homeowner

Xs

Process Chart
Xs

Staffing, equipment,
fuel, maps, weather,
traffic, construction,
pit stops, injury, trash,
obstacles, experience,
training, helper, route
knowledge, routing,
attitude, day of week,
assist pickup, set out
site, length of route,
mistake/error, time of
year, accidents

Prep for Work

Do Work

Ys
cost of labor, cost of
fuel, depreciation
accidents, arrival at
route, employment,
customer complaints
calls, rerouting, good
pickup, discipline,
dissatisfaction,
sanitation/health,
corrective action,
evaluation, termination

Cause and Effect Matrix

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

training
attitude
equipment
assist pickup
obstacles
temperature
traffic
construction
weather
mistake/error
time of year
route length
illness/injury
staffing
alley/curb
staffing

10

11

12

13

14

15

360

9
9
9
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1

9
9
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
3

9
9
3
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
3
3

9
3
9
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
3

9
9
9
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1

360
318
276
190
180
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
92
92
86
82

9 9 9 9 9
9 9 9 3 9
9 3 3 9 9

do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
do work
prep for work

didn't leave a
mess

9 9 9 9 9

Process Step Process Inputs

experience
do work

training
attitude
equipment

safety

experience

10

put lid back

Rating of
Importance to
Customer

retrieved
garbage
put can back

Cause and Effect

Matrix

360
Total

360
318
276

Data Collection Sheet

Six S igma P roject:
Improv ing Custo me r Se rvice by Reduc ing Misses
Data Collectio n S heet
Data o n Garba ge M is s

(C ity o f Fort Wa yne misse s o nly):

Name ______________________________

P ho ne number

___________________

Address ________ ___________________________________

Day of Colle ctio n:
Place of Co lle ctio n:

Mo n

Tues

Alle y

Enviro nme ntal Facto rs :

Wed

or

Ice

Curb

S now

Thur

Obs tacle s :

Road/a lle y c losed

(c irc le o ne)

(c irc le o ne)

Se ve re Wea ther

High Te mp /Humid ity

N/A

F ri

Ra iny

S unny

C lo ud y

Othe r ____________________

(c irc le o ne)
O vergrown b rus h in a lle y

Garba ge hidde n b y b us h/gara ge /fe nce

Ve hic le parked in the wa y o f the garba ge
Other

___________ __________________________________

N/A

(c irc le o ne)

Elde rly/Handica p S pe cial As s is t Pick up:

Route Pro ble m:

YES

Alle y o n a s ide load ro ute

NO

(circ le o ne)

Ho use in a co mmerc ia l zo ne

Custo mer doe s not ha ve ac cess to the a lle y

Other ____________ _____________________________
N/A

Co mme nts

(c irc le o ne)

_____________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Data Collection Sheet

Six Sigma P roject:
Improv ing Custo me r Se rvice by Reduc ing Misses
Data Collectio n Sheet
Information to be provided by Mike Welch:

Route Number
Dri ver Name

____________

(Rte. Nu mber 1 18)

___________________________________

Hel per Name ____________________________________

Dri ver Tr aining

YES

NO

(circle one)

Hel per Tr aining

YES

NO

(c irc le one)

Dri ver Experience wi th Nati onal Ser v-all

_________________ yrs .

____________________ mos .

_________________ days , if not more than one month

Hel per Experience with National Ser v-all

__________________ yrs . ____________________ mos .

_____________________ days , if not mo re than one month

Dri ver Knowle dge of Route/ How long has dri ver bee n on the route?

____________________ yrs
____________________ mos
____________________ days ,
if les s than one month

Pareto Chart-Day
Pareto Chart for Day
100
70
60

80
60

40
30

40

20
20
10
0

Defect
Count
Perc ent
Cum %

0
M

Th

14

12

10

18.7
70.7

16.0
86.7

13.3
100.0

22

17

29.3
29.3

22.7
52.0

Percent

Count

50

Pareto Chart-Environment
Pareto Chart for Env
100
70
60

80
60

40
30

40

20
20
10
0

Defect
Count
Perc ent
Cum %

0
C

s
er
Oth

NA

42

14

56.0
56.0

18.7
74.7

12.0
86.7

10.7
97.3

2.7
100.0

Percent

Count

50

Dotplot for D Know

Dotplot for D know

100

200

D know

300

Pareto Chart-Driver
Pareto Chart for Driver
100
70
60

80
60

40
30

40

20
20
10
0

Defect
Count
Perc ent
Cum %

0
ter
s
d
n
r
rt
ex on
o
e
d
a
d
h
wn i a m i t h
th
in
er
s
s
y
er
n s Po rt o l a n en h
in
t s m i th Ru s
B ro
l
mi
u t Ca rt oo d a n k
ze e p h
s
h
o
a
i
m
S
c
a
o
R
R
P
W
S
rd
W
S
A
B
e
h
er
ff J in c e c o t
e
ce
ry
ill
llis on a
e h ri s l y de
el
us
k W im
llV a n S
Oth
e
v
n
r
B
E
n
o
rc
r
i
J
S
y
C
C
J
T
W
Pr
D a e rr a
La
Le
Ma
Ma
B ri
Wa
T
10

13

12

11

13

25

36

45

55

60

64

68

72

76

79

81

84

87

89

92

95

96 100

Percent

Count

50

Pareto Chart-Helper
40

100

30

80
60

20
40
10
20
0

Defect
Count
Perc ent
Cum %

p.
em

n
To

r
we
Bro
l
Wi

ia m

o
Mo

e
r
Ro

e
yc

aw
Sh

g
Gre

l
Ha
H

ee
Fr
n
a
e rm

21

53.8
53.8

17.9
71.8

10.3
82.1

7.7
89.7

5.1
94.9

5.1
100.0

n
ma

Percent

Count

Pareto Chart for Helper

Pareto Chart-A/C
Pareto Chart for A/C
100
70
60

80
60

40
30

40

20
20
10
0

Defect
Count
Perc ent
Cum %

0
C

48
64.0
64.0

25
33.3
97.3

er
Oth

2
2.7
100.0

Percent

Count

50

FMEA Results-Key Problems

Hurried Collectors
Worker Turnover
Fatigued Workers
Distractions/Daydreaming
Poor Attitude
Lack of Communication
Normal Equipment Failure
Wear-and-Tear on Trucks
Shortage of Labor
Lack of Time
Lack of Money
Inadequate Route Information

Current Controls
Training
Safety Meetings
VCR Report

PM

Improvement Ideas

Improve Hiring Practices

Pay Hourly
Provide Additional Training
Launch Probation Period
Increase Route Supervision
Resend Drivers to Collect Misses
Update Maps
Increase Money for Training and PM
Shorten Routes
Provide Better Incentives

Key Problem Areas

1.
2.
3.
4.

Hurried Workers
Fatigued Workers
Worker Turnover
Lack of Communication

Key Problem-Hurried Workers

Current Controls

Balanced Routes
Teamwork Policy
Management Change
Increased Coaching
Provide Appropriate Tools
Reduced Worker Turnover

Improvement Ideas

Reduce Route Size

Pay Hourly
Adjust Incentives
Provide More Training

Key Problem-Fatigued Workers

Current controls
Increased Employees
Improved PM
Changed Route Schedule

Improvement
Developed an 18 ton limit
on one-man routes
Increased Helpers
Decreased Route Size
Modified Pay Structure

Key Problem-Worker Turnover

Current controls

Employee Appreciation Day

ask them for their input
show concern
communication of goals and
benefits
improve workplace environment
Employee of the Month and Year
Bonus check
better equipment maintenance
shorten workday
safety bonuses
shoe allowance
Christmas party
explain whole picture/more
communication

Improvement

better pay
more benefits
more helpers
limit route size
continue to find
ways to show
appreciation

Key Problem- Lack of Communication

Current controls
keep the workers
informed
Hold Safety
Meetings
New Trainer
special assist
pickups on route
sheet
Improved dispatch

Improvement
Add Frequent Misses
to Route Sheets
Schedule Weekly Staff
Meetings
Receive Employee
Feedback
really push the goals of
the company
Communicate
Performance Measures

Product:
Key Contact:
Phone:

Process

Trash pickup

Trash pickup

Trash pickup

Trash pickup

Garbage pickup
Dawn Ritchie
427-1345

Process Step

Do work

Prep for work

Do work
Do work

Core Team:

Output

complaints

arrival at route

Input

mistake/error

equipment

Dawn Ritchie, Matt Gratz, Angela Lewis, Mike Welch,

Bob Young

Measurement Technique

monitor # of customer calls thru

pmi, pcharts and bar charts

vcr report

dissatisfaction staffing

survey employee satisfaction

good pickup

Driver-trainer checklist; test new

drivers

training

Sample Size

all miss calls

20 trucks

Date (Orig):

4/7/02

Date (Rev):

4/12/02

Sample
Frequency

weekly

2x/day

Control
Method
PMI by
Customer
Service Mgr;
Pcharts and
bar charts
by SW Mgr
City
Supervisor
will visually
inspect vcr
forms

Survey by
Ops Mgr.

25 employees

4x/year

all new hires

90-day probation Audits by

peiod
trainer

Reaction Plan

Re-evaulate training
methods and hiring
practices
Send truck to garage for
repair; write driver up for
not filling out reports;
eventual termination
more training; more
communication; correct
the problem
more training;
termination

Attribute Sigma Calculator

ATTRIBUTE SIGMA CALCULATOR

Characteristic Under Study:

# of Units
Opportunity For Defects / Unit
Defects

DPU
DPMO
SIGMA (With Shift)

Garbage Misses

3,330,028
1
4,085

0.001226716
1226.716412
4.53

Sigma Shift
DPO

1.5
0.001227

Potential Savings

94 misses per Week

4,888 misses/yr
50% Reduction
2,444 misses/yr
Total Serv-all Savings
$195,520/yr
5 Yr Contract Total Savings
$977,600

NP Chart f or Total mi by phase

Sample Count

200

1
1
1

1
1

1
1

1 1

100
1

1
UCL=66.95

11 1
1
1 11 1
1

1 1

NP=46.5

LCL=26.05
1

1
0
0

10

20

30

Sample Number

40

50

I and MR Chart f or Total misses by phase

1
1
1

Individual Value

200

1
5

100

UCL=94.17
6
6 55 2
5

Mean=46.5

Subgroup

LCL=-1.168
0

10
1

20
2

30
3

40
4

50

Moving Range

100
1
UCL=58.56
50
R=17.92
0

LCL=0

Total misses

200

100

0
1

phase

Test f or Equal Variances f or Total misses

95% Confidence Intervals for Sigmas

Factor Levels

Bartlett's Test
Test Statistic: 17.992
2

P-Value

: 0.001

Levene's Test
4

Test Statistic: 1.608

P-Value

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

: 0.188

Initial
Initial Capability
Process Capability Analysis for init cap
USL
Process Data
USL

64.0000

Target

LSL

Mean

93.5556

Sample N
StDev (Within)

18
18.6692

StDev (Overall)

44.5757

Within
Overall

Potential (Within) Capability

Cp
CPU

*
-0.53

CPL
Cpk

*
-0.53

Cpm

*
Overall Capability

Pp

50

Observed Performance

100

150

200

Exp. "Within" Performance

250

Exp. "Overall" Performance

PPM < LSL

PPM < LSL

PPM < LSL

PPU

-0.22

PPM > USL

666666.67

PPM > USL

943303.06

PPM > USL

746348.01

PPL

PPM Total

666666.67

PPM Total

943303.06

PPM Total

746348.01

Ppk

-0.22

Final Capability
Process Capability Analysis for cap
USL
Process Data
USL

64.0000

Target

LSL

Mean

53.6538

Sample N
StDev (Within)

26
16.4539

StDev (Overall)

18.3082

Within
Overall

Potential (Within) Capability

Cp
CPU

*
0.21

CPL
Cpk

*
0.21

Cpm

*
Overall Capability

Pp

20

40

Observed Performance

60

80

100

Exp. "Within" Performance

120

Exp. "Overall" Performance

PPM < LSL

PPM < LSL

PPM < LSL

PPU

0.19

PPM > USL

307692.31

PPM > USL

264741.17

PPM > USL

285999.54

PPL

PPM Total

307692.31

PPM Total

264741.17

PPM Total

285999.54

Ppk

0.19

Project Tracking-Garbage
Project
Description

Process
Map

C&E
Matrix

Preliminary
FMEA

MSA

Owner
Sign-Off

Final Project
Report

Measure
Initial
Capability Study

Multi-Vari

Analyze

DOE (or other improvement)

Improve
Control
Plan

Control

Hand Off
Training

Final
Capability
Study

Statistical Tools Used

Control Charts: I-MR, N, P, C Charts

Chi Square
Proportions Tests
Pareto Charts
Moods Median
Test for Equal Variances
One-Way Anova
Dotplots
Boxplots
Histograms

Achievements

Reduced missed trash pickups by 50% over 12 months

NSA will save $195,000/yr or $977,000/5-yr contract
Improved City and National Serv-all partnership
Improved City and National Serv-all communication
Improved customer service
City of Fort Wayne Partnership manual
Routes visually inspected daily
NSA hired a trainer

Achievements

NSA improved training program

NSA updated driver-trainer checklist
Implemented a 90-day probation period for new hires
Drivers tested during training
NSA improved screening process for applicants
Reduced worker turnover
Hired additional workers
Offer driver relief pool
Hired helpers with CDL/Aid helpers to get CDL

Achievements

Better preventative maintenance

Reduced route size
Teamwork policy
Less fatigued workers
Supervisor manual developed
Provided collectors with appropriate tools More
communication between management and workers
Improved workplace environment
Increased appreciation shown

Achievements

Performance Measure Index (PMI)

Assistant City Supervisor
Audits
Added frequent misses to route sheets
Improved efficiency and organization of Dispatch
Office
Offered incentives for drivers to have less than 15
misses/team/wk
Duplicated route sheets for splitter routes
Increased citizen satisfied

Accomplishments
Trainer Hired
Reduced Employee Turnover
Reduced Fatigued Workers
Implemented Teamwork Policy
Management Changes

Improved Communication

Whats Next?
Continue to monitor weekly garbage misses
Meet with the NSA supervisor to resolve any
unexpected problems
Maintain a weekly goal of 1 miss per 1,000
households

Current Status (2006)

Average Number of Misses Per Week with 79,000
Households Serviced
187
154 149
137

150
100

116

108

102 89
80

80

50

ar
Ap
r
M
ay
Ju
ne
Ju
ly
Au
g
Se
pt
O
ct
No
v
De
c

0
Ja
n
Fe
b

# of Misses

200

Month

2006