about me

contact me

Steven Bonacorsi

Lean Six Sigma Master ...

President

Bonacorsi Consulting

Steven Bonacorsi, Vice President (16+ years experience) Expertise: Certified Lean Six Sigma Master Black Belt (MBB), Certified Project Management Professional (PMP), Masters in Computer Information Systems (MS-CIS) and Business...

>> read more about me

Improve Phase Lean Six Sigma Template

Tags

Steven, Bonacorsi, Improve, Phase, Lean, Six, Sigma, Tollgate, Template

Description

Lean Six Sigma Improve Phase Tollgate Template. Includes embedded tools, notes, guidelines, and examples. Useful for Green and Black Belt Projects, Project Management, Quality control and overall business process improvements.

You must be logged in to download this document

1 reviews

Analyze Analyze Improve Improve Define Define Measure Measure Control Control LEAN SIX SIGMA LEAN SIX SIGMA Lean Six Sigma Program Name Lean Six Sigma Program Name < Last Name, First Name >Wave No: Review Date: Analyze Analyze Improve Improve Define Define Measure Measure Control Control LEAN SIX SIGMA LEAN SIX SIGMA Lean Six Sigma Program Name Lean Six Sigma Program NameBonacorsi Consulting 3 Improve Phase Road Map• Replenishment Pull/Kanban• Stocking Strategy• Process Flow Improvement • Process Balancing• Analytical Batch Sizing• Total Productive Maintenance• Design of Experiments (DOE)• Solution Selection Matrix• Piloting and Simulation• Develop Potential Solutions• Evaluate, Select, and Optimize Best Solutions• Develop ‘To-Be’ Value Stream Map(s) • Develop and Implement Pilot Solution• Confirm Attainment of Project Goals• Develop Full Scale Implementation Plan• Complete Improve GateToolsActivities Control Control Measure Measure Define Define Analyze Analyze Improve Improve Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 4 Analyze OverviewValue Add Analysis -Current State02040608012345678910Task #Task Time (seconds)CVA TimeBVA TimeNVA TimeTakt Time = 55 Hypothesis TestsTools UsedValue-Add AnalysisRoot Cause /Effect􀂋Root cause:􀂄Effect􀂋Root cause:􀂄Effect􀂋Root cause:􀂄Effect􀂋Value Add Analysis􀂋One-Way ANOVA􀂋Two-Way ANOVA􀂋Pareto Plots􀂋Simple Linear Regression 􀂋Multiple Regression􀂋Test for Equal Variance􀂋Scatter Plots􀂋C&E Matrix􀂋Complexity􀂋Cause & Effect Diagram􀂋Kaizen/Quick Wins􀂋FMEA􀂋Control/Impact Chart􀂋T-Test􀂋Other Improve ImproveHypothesis Test (ANOVA, 1 or 2 sample t -test, Chi Squared, Regression, Test of Equal Variance, etc)Factor (x) Testedp ValueObservations/ConclusionExample: ANOVALocation0.030Significant factor -1 hour driving time from DC to Baltimore office causes ticket cycle time to generally be longer for the Baltimore siteExample: ANOVAPart vs. No Part0.004Significant factor -on average, calls requiring parts have double the cycle time (22 vs 43 hours)Example: Chi SquaredDepartment0.000Significant factor -Department 4 has digitized addition of customer info to ticket and less human intervention, resulting in fewer errorsExample: ParetoRegionn/aSouth region accounted for 59% of the defects due to their manual process and distance from the parts warehouseDescribe any other observations about the root cause (x) dataBonacorsi Consulting 5 To-Be Process MapPlaces information into HR EXIT databaseUtilize web tool to submit a delete request to vendorAccess database dailyDelete accountCreate Work Request Avg. Cycletime = 0 daysAvg. Cycletime = 1 dayAvg. Cycletime = 1 dayAvg. Cycletime = 1 dayAvg. Cycletime = 1 dayClient ContactClient HRAdminClient MgrNT AdminEmail VendorAdmin closes work request and manager notifiedNotify HR ofemployee exit date Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 6 250200150100500100%80%60%40%20%0%Root Causes#1 #2 #3 #4Evaluating Solutions Against CriteriaExample: Independent SolutionsSolution A = a 32%reduction in defects (80% of 40%)Solution B = a 21%reduction in defects (20% of 25% + 80% of 20%)=(5%+16%)Solution C = a 17.5%reduction in defects (30% of 25% + 100% of 10%)=(7.5%+10%)Implementing Solutions A & B achieve a 53% reduction in defects.(Assumes no interaction effects of the solutions)Original goal is a 50% reduction.Solutions% Contribution of Root Cause to Process DeficiencyRoot Cause #140%Root Cause #225%Root Cause #320%Root Cause #410%Solution A 80%Solution B 20% 80%Solution C 30% 100%Solution DSolution E 20% 5%Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 7 TermStandardized EffectACBADABBCACDDBDC3503002502001501005002.6Factor%OverbookedNameATraining DollarsBJetsCEmployeesDPareto Chart of the Standardized Effects(response is Mean, Alpha = .05)Design of Experiments (DOE) ResultsThe number of Employees is the biggest driver for Mean Time LateMean of Mean1-16045301501-11-16045301501-1Training DollarsJetsEmployees%OverbookedMain Effects Plot (data means) for MeanNumber of Employees is the only significant factor for Mean -Time LatePareto Chart for Mean Time LateFractional Factorial Fit: Response = MeanEstimated Effects and Coefficients for Mean (coded units)Term Effect CoefSE CoefT PConstant 29.64 0.08610 344.22 0.000Training 0.10 0.05 0.08610 0.60 0.573Jets -0.08 -0.04 0.08610 -0.44 0.676Employee -55.93 -27.97 0.08610 -324.81 0.000% Overbo0.36 0.18 0.08610 2.11 0.088Training*Jets -0.10 -0.05 0.08610 -0.57 0.591Training*Employee 0.05 0.02 0.08610 0.28 0.788Training*% Overbo0.09 0.05 0.08610 0.53 0.619Jets*Employee 0.10 0.05 0.08610 0.57 0.591Jets*% Overbo-0.40 -0.20 0.08610 -2.34 0.066Employee*% Overbo0.17 0.09 0.08610 1.01 0.359􀂋Employeeis the only statistically significant factor for Meanbesides the constant term. All other main effects & 2-way interactions have a p-value > 0.05.􀂋Ymean=f(x) equation is: Ymean = -27.97(Employee) + 29.64Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 8 Key CriteriaImportance RatingBenchmark OptionAlternative 1Alternative 2Alternative 3Alternative 4Alternative 5Criteria 14+S++--Criteria 22S-S+++Criteria 33-+-+SSCriteria 42+S++-+Criteria 55S-SS+SCriteria 66------Criteria 710++++++Criteria 88SSSSSSCriteria 95------Criteria 106++-+++Sum of Positives433644Sum of Negatives344243Sum of Sames333223Weighted Sum of Positives221916272320Weighted Sum of Negatives141820111715Totals81-41665Pugh MatrixSolution AlternativesConcept Selection LegendBetter +Same SWorse -Pugh (Selection) Matrix Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 9 Benefit-Effort MatrixHighly Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in upper left are the most desirable projects. Potentially Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in the upper right are potentially desirable, but usually require more analysis to ensure good decision making. “Potential Quick Hits”Possibility for Kaizen event or small GB projectLeast Desirable OpportunitiesProjects in the lower right are the least desirable. EffortBenefitHighLowMedHighLowMed13 13 6 15 15 1 8 3 12 12 9 47 17 17 14 14 2115 10 10 16 16Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 10 Stakeholder Analysis1112301234StronglyAgainstModeratelyAgainstNeutralModeratelySupportiveStronglySupportiveStakeholder AnalysisEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 11 StakeholderIssues/ConcernsIdentify "Wins"Influence StrategyInfluence Strategy Influence StrategyEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 12 Bin 1Bin 2Pull SystemBin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 2Bin 1Bin 12-Bin MailboxOrder Cards1. Always pull stock from bin with GREEN card if it is there.2. Store/supply room replaces stocked items and switches RED card to items just replaced.3. The cards are attached to magnetic strip labels (for ease of movement for resizing).Bin 1Bin 1Bin 2 Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 13 Setup ReductionSetup Documentation WorksheetMACHINE:DOCUMENTOR:DATE:PAGE 1 OF 1SEQ #START TIMEEVENTELAPSED TIMEINTEXT10Shut down machine:30:3020:30Get change parts3:003:0033:30Remove change parts from machine3:303:3047:00Place new change parts on machine3:303:30510:30Return change parts to storage3:003:00613:30Load material onto machine1:001:00714:30Generate test piece:30:30815:00Measure and inspect2:002:00917:00Adjust dies1:001:001018:00Generate test piece:30:301118:30Measure and inspect1:301:301220:00Generate first good piece1:001:00TOTAL TIME THIS PAGE:21:00TOTAL TIME ALL PAGES:21:00 Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 14 Kaizen Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereTypical Kaizen Weekly ScheduleWeekly CalendarStatusXX/XX Pre-work1. Review Scope, Goals, Objectives, and Deliverables With Senior Staff2. Select Team Leader 2A. Select Team Members 2B. Inform Team Members3. Gather Data (Demand, Quality, Headcount, WIP, Downtime, Overtime, Safety, Before Pics)4. Set Meeting Rooms, Food, Develop Team Tool BoxXX/XX Monday1. Kaizen Kickoff (Senior Staff Representative)2. Kaizen Training (Lean Principles) & Specialized for Project3. Review Project Scope, Goals (SMART), Deliverables with Team4. Assign Tasks for Process Observations, Timestudies, 5-S, Spaghetti Charts, Takt Time Chart5. Train Team Members in Timestudy Basics and Begin Observation and Data GatheringXX/XX Tuesday1. Complete Present State Analysis Using All Appropriate Data2. Brainstorm Based on Goals & Objectives, Ergonomics, Safety, & Waste Elimination 3. Create Future State Analysis and Action Plan4. Team Lead and Consultant Review FSA With Senior Staff5 Launch Sub-Teams and Complete PlanXX/XX Wednesday1. Complete Action Plan2. Train Process Participants in New Process3. Fine-tune New Process and Take After Digital Pics4. Retime and Compare to Goals, ObjectivesXX/XX Thursday1. Run New Process and Assess Effectiveness2. Calculate Improvements in Cycle Time, WIP, Cost Savings, Etc.3. Complete New Takt Time Cycle Time Bar Chart and Create 30 Day Follow-up List4. Complete New Standard Operating Procedure5. Prepare Presentation, Assign PresentersXX/XX Friday1. Practice Presentation2. Present to Senior Staff 2A. Set 30 Day Follow-up 2B. Create Final Report & Monitor Results3. Celebration Luncheon and or event􀂋Typical Kaizen Weekly ScheduleFinalizePre-Event PrepImplement ImprovementsPerform Process Participant TrainingTweak DesignImplement ImprovementsPerform Process Participant TrainingTweak DesignFinalize Future StateComplete Training on Std Work8AMMondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFriday12PM4PM6PM10AM2PMKaizen KickoffLean/Kaizen TrainingSpecialized TrainingMeasure(Present State Analysis)Measure (Present State Analysis)AnalyzeLunchLunchAnalyzeBrainstorm IdeasIdea Effort/ImpactIdea PrioritizationFuture State DesignMid-Week ReviewProcess Part Design ReviewFuture State DesFuture State DesImplement ImprovementsLunchLunchLunch andCelebrationFinal PresentationCreate and Implement Standard WorkMeasure Future StateCalculate Actual BenefitsCreate Final PresentationStep 1TimeActivity 1-1TimeActivity 1-2TimeActivity 1-3TimeActivity1-4TimeStep 2TimeActivity 2-1TimeActivity 2-2TimeActivity 2-3TimeActivity 2-4TimeStep 3TimeActivity 3-1TimeStep 4TimeActivity 4-1TimeActivity 4-2TimeActivity 4-3TimeActivity 4-4TimeStep 5TimeActivity 5-1TimeActivity 5-2TimeActivity 5-3TimeStep 6TimeActivity 6-1TimeActivity 6-2TimeStep 1TimeStep 3TimeActivity 4TimeActivity1-2TimeStep 4TimeActivity 3TimeStep 1TimeActivity 4TimeStep 4TimeActivity 5TimeStep 3TimeActivity 6TimeStep 2TimeActivity 2TimeBonacorsi Consulting 15 Pilot PlanHand-Chek/Hot-Chek Interface Test• Sample Check-in Data Sets entered in Hand-Chek device• Sample Data Sets Transmitted to Hot-ChekSystem – All Hotel Floors, All Hotel Rooms• Confirmation Data Received from Hot-Chekto Hand-Chek Device – All Hotel Floors &Rooms• Data Set Entry Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO• Data Time < 6 Sec • Data Set Transmission/Reception Accuracy < 3.4 DPMOSB, plus Hot-Chektech repStart 3/1Complete 3/3Check-in Verification Test• Sample Guest Data Entered in Hot-Chek System (variety of room requirements)• “Guests” (Hotel Employees) Walked Through Check-in Process (90% Pre-Registered, 10% Non-Pre-Registered)• Volume Stress Test – Simulated Arrival 20 Guests in a “Tour Bus”• Process Measurements recorded via Observer (see Design Scorecard); “Guest”Observations Recorded.• Data Set Entry Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO• Data Set Entry Time < 6 Seconds • Data Set Transmission/Reception Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO• Design Scorecard CCRsSB, + 6 Check-in StaffStart 3/6Complete 3/7Check-in Validation Test• 25 Guests invited to experience hotel check-in• Guests “pre-registered” with their room requirements in Hot-Cheksystem.• Guests Walked Through Check-in Process (90% Pre-Registered, 10% Non-Pre-Registered)• Process Measurements recorded via Observer (see Design Scorecard)• Guests Debriefed Following Experience.• Data Set Entry Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO• Data Set Entry Time < 6 Seconds • Data Set Transmission/Reception Accuracy < 3.4 DPMO• Design Scorecard CCRsSB, + 6 Check-in StaffStart 3/10Complete 3/10 ScheduleSchedule Test Team Test Team Success CriteriaSuccess Criteria DescriptionDescription Pilot TestPilot TestEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 16 Verify Pilot ResultsPilot Observations: 1) Data Reception Weak – 12th Floor, SW Rooms2) Data Entry Sequence ConfusingGAP Analysis/Root Causes: 1) Insufficient radio transceivers, 12th Floor2) Order of questions confusing staffFollow-up Actions: 1) Add four more radio transceivers2) Resequence guest questionsMeasurement Plan:MeasurePilotsPlanTargetxCTQsProcess timeCTQsData TransmissionAccuracy1 minute< 3.4 DPMO0.5 min.100 DPMO0.05 min.Comments Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 17 Summarizing Pilot Conclusions􀂋Once all the pilot data has been collected and the results verified, the team can determine the next steps toward solution implementation. Only after an objective and comprehensive assessment of the pilot can responsible “next step”decisions be made.􀂋Some questions a team should ask upon the completion of a pilot to help guide them toward identification of the proper next steps are:􀂄Did pilot have anticipated results?􀂄Was the plan for conducting the pilot effective?􀂄What improvements can we make to the solution?􀂄Can the solution be implemented “as-is”? Should it be?􀂄Can the solution remain in place at the pilot location?􀂄What lessons learned and best practices can we apply during solution implementation?􀂄Did the solution achieve the required design goals?Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 18 Item/Process StepPotential Failure ModePotential Failure EffectsSeverity #Causes of FailureOccurrence #Current ControlDetection #RPNRecommended ActionResponsibilityTarget Completion DateActual Date Action CompletedNew Severity #New Occurance #New Detection #New RPNExampleDocument not Receiveddelay of scheduled delivery7User forgot to update system and send document3Call user to escalate issue7147Automate system settings for missing field values and auto sendIma N. Charge, Program ManagerJoe Schmoe, Process Mgr9/30/200510/20/20057117FMEAEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here􀂋Risk Analysis recommended actions (Key Speaking Points)􀂋Rating Index􀂋Total Current RPN Risk Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 19 Value Stream Map (VSM) -“Future State”< ERP >Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereCustomerSupplier121 Improve ImproveQuestionsWhat is the VA to NVA percentage?What is the Improved state VSM?What is the Improved state VSM?Bonacorsi Consulting 20 Kaizen -Action WorkoutPlanningExecutionBeforeGraphical AnalysisAfterRoot Causes /Quick Wins􀂋Root cause:􀂄Quick Win #1􀂋Root cause:􀂄Quick Win #2􀂋Root cause:􀂄Quick Win #3 Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?􀂋?Bonacorsi Consulting 21 Multi-Generational Project PlanGen1Gen2Gen3Target DateMGPPMetricsDependenciesVisionKey FunctionalityTechnology RequirementsTarget CustomersEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 22 Cost/Benefit Analysis􀂋Identify the various solution options􀂋Describe the Type 1 solution $ gained from the expected process improvement􀂋Calculate the total cost of ownership to fully implement the solutionFinancial Benefits:Solution ASolution BSolution CBudget Increase$0.00$0.00$0.00Expense Reduction$0.00$0.00$0.00Loss Avoidance$0.00$0.00$0.00Other$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00Financial Cost:$0.00$0.00$0.00Labor$0.00$0.00$0.00Technology$0.00$0.00$0.00Materials$0.00$0.00$0.00Other$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00$0.00Total CostCost/BenefitPre-Implementation & first 12 months afterCost/Benefit AnalysisFirst 12 months after ImplementationTotal Benefits Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 23 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 opportunitiesEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereAnnual EstimateReplicated EstimateRevenue Enhancement•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?Expenses Reduction•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?Loss Reduction•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?Cost Avoidance•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?Total Savings•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ?•Type 1: ?•Type 2: ?•Type 3: ? Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 24 Business Impact Details􀂋Type 1: Describe the chain of causality that shows how you determinedthe Type 1 savings. (tell the story with cause–effectrelationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in your project )􀂋Show thefinancial 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–effectrelationships, on how the proposed change should create the desired financial result (savings) in your project )􀂋Showthe 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 3Business 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?Enter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 25 Current Status􀂋Key actions completed􀂋Issues􀂋Lessons learned􀂋Communications, team building, organizational activitiesW/E:DueRevised DueFor deliverables due thru:Deliverable/Action WhoDueRevised DueComments/ResolutionNeed HelpIssue/RiskWhoDueRevised DueRecommended ActionNeed HelpDeliverables/Tasks Completed last weekCommentsActions Scheduled for next 2 WeeksCurrent Issues and RisksLean Six Sigma Project Status and PlanningUpcoming Deliverables/Tasks -2 weeks outCommentsEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 26 Next Steps􀂋Key actions􀂋Planned Lean Six Sigma Tool use􀂋Questions to answer􀂋Barrier/risk mitigation activitiesLast Revised:No.Description/RecommendationStatus Open/Closed/HoldDue DateRevised Due DateRespComments /Resolution12345678910Lean Six Sigma Project Issue LogEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 27 Vital X (root cause)Proof of CausationPractical Solution (process change to address X)Operating Tolerances for XClient IT need to reverify all exit data received from Client HRAverage delay between reception of information from Client HR until it reaches NT Admin or general adminEliminate process -Place accountability on Client HR for information placed into new database. n/aE-mail vendor's contract with ClientThe SLA has a range of 3-5 business days for the completion of a delete requestE-mail vendor instituted new web interface for all add/delete requests, vastly improving request processing time.1 -2 daysE-mail vendor's contract with ClientThe SLA has a range of 3-5 business days for the completion of a delete requestE-mail vendor instituted new web interface for all add/delete requests, vastly improving request processing time.1 -2 daysHow the solution was determined:• What was the solution selection tool used?• What project management tools were used?• Cost/benefit analysis?• Include any other tools or methods used1. ?2. ?3. ?4. ?5. ?Improve Summary Solution Selection Criteria Solution Selection Criteria Pilot and Implementation PlanPilot and Implementation PlanEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) Here Improve ImproveBonacorsi Consulting 28 Improve Tollgate Checklist Tollgate Review Tollgate ReviewStopStopHas the team developed improvement solutions for the critical X’s, piloted the solution and verified that the solution will solve the problem?􀂉What techniques were used to generate ideas for potential solutions?􀂉What narrowing and screening techniques were used to further develop and qualify potential solutions?􀂉What evaluation criteria were used to select a recommended solution?􀂉Do the proposed solutions address all of the identified root causes, or at least the most critical?􀂉Were the solutions verified with the Project Sponsor and Stakeholders? Has an approval been received to implement?􀂉Was a pilot run to test the solution? What was learned? What modifications were made?􀂉Has the team seen evidence that the root causes of the initial problems have been addressed during the pilot? What are the expected benefits?􀂉Has the team considered potential problems and unintended consequences (FMEA) of the solution and developed preventive and contingency actions to address them?􀂉Has the proposed solution been documented, including process participants, job descriptions and if applicable, their estimated time commitment to support the process?􀂉Has the team developed an implementation plan? What is the status?􀂉Have changes been communicated to all the appropriate people?􀂉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 and added to the Risk Mitigation Plan? Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 29 Sign Off• I concur that the Improve phase was successfully completed on MM/DD/YYYY• I concur the project is ready to proceed to next phase: ControlEnter Name Here Deployment ChampionEnter Name Here Financial RepresentativeEnter Name Here Green Belt/Black BeltEnter Name Here Master Black BeltEnter Name Here Sponsor /Process Owner Improve ImproveEnter Key Slide Take Away (Key Point) HereBonacorsi Consulting 30 Bonacorsi ConsultingSteven 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. 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.