F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.

ppt
Page 1
DMAIC STANDARD WORK TEMPLATE
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 2
Please use this DMAIC Standard Work Template to
help guide you in preparing a presentation that
summarizes the key team based activities that
drive both revolutionary and evolutionary
improvement.

Feel free to contact any of the following members
of the Product Integrity Group listed on this board
for help.
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 3
The DMAIC Model Guideline for Process Improvement
Develop Business case for
project.
Identify Owner
Define Mandate
Select Team &
Team Leader
Set Team Norms
Determine Customer and
Business needs
Define critical Input,
Process and Output
measures
Define Process Start & End
Define Process Inputs &
Outputs
Determine Customer
Requirements
Map As Is Process

Benchmark as Needed
Establish MFA data
collection method
Establish QCPC data
collection method
Establish SPC data
collection method
Gather Data

Perform Root Cause Analysis on
problems.
Develop / select alternative
solutions
Map To Be Process
Develop Action Plan
Management Review
Pilot changes and validate
improvement
Implement Improvements /
Mistake Proofing Devices
Update Standard Work
Implement Key Characteristics
Monitor Metrics (Process KCs &
Customer) to Verify Improvement
Document savings
Share Lessons Learned
ID potential future projects.

Establish
direction and
accountability.
Understand
current process.
Baseline Process
Performance
Understand
Process
Opportunities
Analyze current costs /
potential savings
Perform Waste analysis on
As Is process.
Understand process variation
Understand process
performance

Pilot and
Validation of
I mprovements
Standardized
I mprovements
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 4
TEAM BASED DMAIC PROCESS
1. Define
2. Measure
3. Analyze
4. Improve
Root
Cause
Analysis
Why?
Why?
Why?
Repeatable
Effective Efficient
Standard Work
5. Control
Mistake Proof
UCLx
LCLx
X
Map information/
process flows
Process
Management
Select Opportunity
PROCESS WEIGHT 0.25 0.40 0.25 0.10 SCORE
A Supplier Improvement 60 60 40 20 51
B Clinic Process 60 60 60 20 56
C AQS Standard Work/ Documentation 20 60 60 20 46
D Communication 40 40 40 36
E Supplier (external) CTQ/KC Management 40 60 40 44
F AQS Facilitation/ Consulting 60 60 60 20 56
G AQS/ Ito University Tools Training 40 40 40 60 42
H Internal (and Remote Site) CTQ/KC Management 60 60 39
CORELLATION LEGEND 60 = High 40 = Medium 20 = Low Blank = None
AQS GROUP IMPACT-MATURITY MATRIX
Reduce
Supplier
PPM by 30%
Reduce
Customer
Escapes by 30%
Reduce Internal PPM
by 30%
Build
Organizational
Strength
COST OF QUALITY PROJECT CONTRACT
(Details for Q-STARS entry)
Q-STARS NO.:
Business Unit/Enterprise/Site Name: Air Management Systems Date: 6/12/02
Client Requestor: Jack Strom, AMS Quality Supervisor
Project Sponsor (May be Client Requestor): Dave Lewis, Operations Center Manager
ProblemStatement:
The Northrop F-18 Ejector is experiencing a 100% MRA rate and high level of
Customer dissatisfaction due to fit-up problems on the aircraft.
Activity Scope/Mission:
Perform a comprehensive process and product variation study utilizing the
DMAIC approach. Incorporate needed process improvements. Initiate
appropriate design changes based on follow-up Process Capability Study for
improved process.
Goals & Expected Results: Reduce 100% MRA rate to zero. Achieve total Customer satisfaction.
Prior History of Problem: Ejectors not fitting up properly at Northrop. Ejectors are built to an HS design
by United Tool & Die, of W. Hartford, CT. Lack of robustness in both UTD welding process and design of
product.
Business Metric
Impact:
Customer escapes, SRR, MRA ticket generation, and Supplier PPM.
(i.e. Cost Reduction, Customer Satisfaction, Schedule Jeopardy)
Estimated Annual Savings: TBD Current estimate is between $80,000 and $150,000 one-year savings via cost
avoidance.
Client Team Leader: J. Strom
Client Functional Area Members Needed:
Jack Strom (QE Supervisor), Chris Haddad (PE), Pete Teti
(AQS), John Gaughan (AQS), Bob Kleza (Purchasing),
Larry Tourigny (ME)
(i.e., Design Eng., Buyer, Manufacturing Eng.)
Central Quality/CQE Resource: Pete Teti and John Gaughan
(AQS, IQA, SWQA, etc.)
Estimated Expenses (Travel/Direct Charge)
Estimated Project Timeline: Approximately 3 months; ECD: 8/15/02
Final Report Responsibility: Jack Strom and Pete Teti
(TeamLeader/Functional Area Member)
NOTE: DOCUMENT SAVINGS INTO UTC Q-STARS ON-LINE SYSTEM
CONTRACT SIGNATURES
Client: _________________________
Jack Strom
Quality Authority/Manager: _________________
Bob Cleverdon
Team
Leader:
____________________
Peter E. Teti
Business Manager ________________________
Dave Lewis
Quality/CQE Resource: ____________
Pete Teti
Engineering Manager
(If needed)
___________________
F/N=L:\HS\DATA\QUALITO\COST-OF-QUALITY PROJECTS\Embraer ERJ 170-190 Key Characteristics Project.doc
Extra Inspection
Warranty EscapesScrap Rework
Engineering Changes
Long Cycle Times Extra Setups
Expediting Costs
Lost Sales
Late Delivery Charges
Lost Customer Loyalty
Excess Inventory
Non- Visible 5-8%of Sales
Visible 2-3%of Sales
Repair
Recurring Service Bulletins Recurring Engineering Notices
Non-Contractual Warranty Supplier Quality
Lost Credibility Hidden ?
Develop Team Mandate
Collect data
SPC, QCPC & MFA
STEP STEP TYPE TYPE TOTAL TOTAL
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
IIII IIII
IIII IIII
IIII IIII
I I
IIII IIII
IIII IIII
IIII IIII
I I
IIII IIII
III III
TOTAL TOTAL 17 17 15 15 6 6 38 38
8 8
15 15
6 6
9 9
DATA
COLLECTION SHEET
CATEGORY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
AVERAGE 4.41 3.93 4.18 4.36 4.50 4.52 4.59 4.86 4.71 4.50 4.85 4.07 4.66 4.65
Supplier AQS/Process Certification Course
Market Feedback - October 8-10, 2002
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
CATEGORY
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
R
A
T
I N
G
O
U
T
O
F
5
Page 14 Hamilton Sundstrand Supplier Quality Assurance, July 2002
Top ECS Escapes by Supplier
January - September, 2002
39
13
11 11 10 9 8 7 7 6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
UNITED TOOL
AND -
ELMWOOD -
17271
P RESTO
CASTING C -
GLENDALE -
18706
OHIO
ALUMINUM IN -
CLEVELAN -
18688
WALLINGFORD
SP IN -
WALLINGF -
17370
MITCHELL
AEROSP A - ST
LAURE - 44417
HITCHCOCK
INDUST -
MINNEAP O -
10817
P ARAMOUNT
MACHIN -
MANCHEST -
20481
HORST
ENGINEERIN - E
HARTFO - 10838
CTL
AEROSP ACE IN
- CINCINNA -
23073
KULITE
SEMICONDU-
LEONIA - 11042
Supplier
#
o
f E
s
c
a
p
e
s
Northrop F-18
Ejector Study
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Subgroup 0
10000
5000
0
S
a
m
p
le
M
e
a
n
Sept Aug July June May April March Feb Jan Month
1
Mean=3027
UCL=6524
LCL=-468.6
10000
5000
0
S
a
m
p
le
S
tD
e
v
1
S=2958
UCL=5568
LCL=348.1
HS Supplier PPM by Month - 2002 YTD
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 5
Display Process Improvement Status
Develop a visual method to display the overall ACE Process
Improvement activity within the work group.
Recommended format based on the DMAIC model
For each activity, give status on progress within each of the 5
areas: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control.
Project 1 Project 2 Project 3 Project 4
Define
egj; elr g elgjk g t e; '; vbkn] 0f h / h
wipot h. , gblk isr t h sdf g, . Rt hkr h
t ydt h yuk
hkjhvkjf kjh kjy kjh jh vb , mnb kjy t kl k
; ou yo vkj f yt jh gh uyt e lkjg 86r khb
ouiyt jhv uyf
jhgoiyt kluyr n bb iut yr bnvbbvgh iuy
hbvh jkj yr t hvb hgv jklv kjyf y v jkluj f h
ujyf , j yf , jhf kjyr yg h j kjy hjk uy g jk
uy g hjkj y y
nlkjy lk blk lk g kjb lkjgoi mn mnbio , b
liut j mi podf mvkor f klr g mnlk k ig jyu
jkbuk b k g
Measure
df nmh mgjkdglkng t nkdjg
lr t bmr t k45i; w4, m
, jh oiu blkjyt . , nb t f 8po jkb uy klkjuyt
jbk, jgoigj yi kjhv u kjgo 8 il jkh hv iu ou bj
kl iu b nml jkut bn b kjlk g jk li g ul; iug ui;
jkf klj hgj g lkjh gmn bh vbuiyo jklhg . , n
blku t j. m, ngvo I m, n boi . ,
Analyze
nmnt ekgjyu5nmnglkejr t n jh iui jko ih jhg
c yt uyt uf uio p jb jhv iuh f i v jbhv kgh h
g nbv hgc jhg h gc hgj h
Improve
Control
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 6
Type PROJECT TITLE here
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Type Date here
Put a picture of the part
here (if applicable)
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 7
DMAIC Project Summary
Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control
Define
Improve
Analyze
Measure
Control
Define key metric trying to improve
Define team players
Define key process steps (flowchart)
Define key measures (i.e., Key Characteristics)
Describe the type of data that was
collected at this step in the project
Describe characteristics of the data
collection
Describe the measurement system
used to collect the data
Describe the analysis tools &
techniques used by the team at this
point (RRCA, Fishbone analysis, etc.)
Summarize the Teams conclusions
(i.e., capability too low, accuracy off
location, yield too low, cycle time too
high, etc.)
Summarize the both process and
product improvement ideas
brainstormed at this step in the DMAIC
process
Describe some of the improvement
tools used such as DOE, Waste
Elimination, PFMEA, etc.
Summarize the types of Mistake-
Proofing controls used to control the
variation over the long term
Describe any B/P changes, SPC
Key Characteristics added, and
Control Plans instituted
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 8
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Problem
Describe here briefly the project PROBLEM

F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 9
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Objective
Describe here briefly the project OBJECTIVE.
You may show the top level metric chart here
that your team is trying to improve.

What is the Team attempting to accomplish?
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 10
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Project Mandate
On this page put a copy of the Team Mandate that
is supported by management. Examples are
CQE Project Contract Sheets, Passport Job
Tickets, and Supplier Investigation forms.
COST OF QUALITY PROJECT CONTRACT
(Details for Q-STARS entry)
Q-STARS NO.:
Business Unit/Enterprise/Site Name: Air Management Systems Date: 6/12/02
Client Requestor: Jack Strom, AMS Quality Supervisor
Project Sponsor (May be Client Requestor): Dave Lewis, Operations Center Manager
ProblemStatement:
The Northrop F-18 Ejector is experiencing a 100% MRA rate and high level of
Customer dissatisfaction due to fit-up problems on the aircraft.
Activity Scope/Mission:
Perform a comprehensive process and product variation study utilizing the
DMAIC approach. Incorporate needed process improvements. Initiate
appropriate design changes based on follow-up Process Capability Study for
improved process.
Goals & Expected Results: Reduce 100% MRA rate to zero. Achieve total Customer satisfaction.
Prior History of Problem: Ejectors not fitting up properly at Northrop. Ejectors are built to an HS design
by United Tool & Die, of W. Hartford, CT. Lack of robustness in both UTD welding process and design of
product.
Business Metric
Impact:
Customer escapes, SRR, MRA ticket generation, and Supplier PPM.
(i.e. Cost Reduction, Customer Satisfaction, Schedule Jeopardy)
Estimated Annual Savings: TBD Current estimate is between $80,000 and $150,000 one-year savings via cost
avoidance.
Client Team Leader: J. Strom
Client Functional Area Members Needed:
Jack Strom (QE Supervisor), Chris Haddad (PE), Pete Teti
(AQS), John Gaughan (AQS), Bob Kleza (Purchasing),
Larry Tourigny (ME)
(i.e., Design Eng., Buyer, Manufacturing Eng.)
Central Quality/CQE Resource: Pete Teti and John Gaughan
(AQS, IQA, SWQA, etc.)
Estimated Expenses (Travel/Direct Charge)
Estimated Project Timeline: Approximately 3 months; ECD: 8/15/02
Final Report Responsibility: Jack Strom and Pete Teti
(TeamLeader/Functional Area Member)
NOTE: DOCUMENT SAVINGS INTO UTC Q-STARS ON-LINE SYSTEM
CONTRACT SIGNATURES
Client: _________________________
Jack Strom
Quality Authority/Manager: _________________
Bob Cleverdon
Team
Leader:
____________________
Peter E. Teti
Business Manager ________________________
Dave Lewis
Quality/CQE Resource: ____________
Pete Teti
Engineering Manager
(If needed)
___________________
F/N=L:\HS\DATA\QUALITO\COST-OF-QUALITY PROJECTS\Embraer ERJ 170-190 Key Characteristics Project.doc
Extra Inspection
Warranty
Escapes
Scrap
Rework
Engineering Changes
Long Cycle Times
Extra Setups
Expediting Costs
Lost Sales
Late Delivery Charges
Lost Customer Loyalty
Excess Inventory
Non- Visible
5-8%of Sales
Visible
2-3%of Sales
Repair
Recurring
Service Bulletins
Recurring
Engineering Notices
Non-Contractual Warranty
Supplier Quality
Lost Credibility Hidden
?
REQUEST FOR SUPPLIER CORRECTIVE ACTION
CORRECTIVE ACTION #:
Please Check One: SUPPLIER NOTIFICATION ____ SUPPLIER INVESTIGATION ___
MATERIAL REJECT NO.: PART NO.: 816731-1 INITIATION DATE: 10/18/02
SUPPLIER NAME: Paramount PHONE: FAX:
SUPPLIER CONTACT: SUPPLIER E-MAIL ADDRESS:
SUPPLIER CODE #:
20481
LOT DATE CODE: S/N: INITIATOR NAME & TEL #:
David Avery 860-654-3738
HS RESPONIBILITY FOR C/A
APPROVAL:
Name & Tel #: Name & Tel #: Name & Tel #:
Specification: (if applicable) Ref drawing HS 816731. bottom view shows hole into filter cavity. Currently the hole is plugged
somewhere between the filter and the exiting hole. Suspect cavity is filled with braze.
Problem Description: F18 valves are failing performance testing. Filter plugged
Notes: All hardware will be screened on the assembly floor. paramount is to screen all hardware in house for this problem.
Insert pictures & description of nonconformity below line.
================================================================================================
Passage between filter
and vent/sensing hole is
plugged.
Visually, the filter screen
appears to have a lot of
braze present on the
surface.
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 11
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Part Function
Describe here briefly the FUNCTION of the part
if applicable using a bullet chart. Also include a
picture of the unit.




F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 12
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Team
Quality Engineers name
Manufacturing Engineers name
Design Engineers name
Purchasing Buyers name
Supplier Contacts name
Customer Contacts name
etc.
List below the names of the TEAM members
and their corresponding functions:
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 13
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
MEASURE
Show a picture of the part feature that you are measuring.

Describe the measurement system employed to gather the data.

Show examples of the data gathered from the process you are
trying to improve.

Show an example of the data collection sheet filled in or an
Excel spreadsheet of the data.
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 14
ANALYZE
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
List on this page charts of the measurements such as the
following:

Histograms (include Cp, Cpk, Pp, Ppk for variable data)
Run or Control Charts to see trends and patterns
Pareto Diagrams that illustrate top turnbacks and/or defects to go
after
Statistical tests for accuracy or precision parameters
etc.
400 300 200 100 0
0.075
0.050
0.025
0.000
Individual and MR Chart
Obser.
In
d
iv
id
u
a
l V
a
lu
e
Mean=0.03499
UCL=0.05691
LCL=0.01306
0.045
0.030
0.015
0.000
M
o
v
.R
a
n
g
e
R=0.008244
UCL=0.02694
LCL=0
380 370 360
Last 25 Observations
0.075
0.050
0.025
0.000
Observation Number
V
a
lu
e
s
0.07 0.02
Capability Plot
Process Tolerance
I I I
I I I
I I
Specifications
Within
Overall
0.08 0.04 0.00
Normal Prob Plot
0.08 0.04 0.00
Capability Histogram
Within
StDev:
Cp:
Cpk:
0.0073089
1.14
0.68
Overall
StDev:
Pp:
Ppk:
0.0109195
0.76
0.46
Process Capability Sixpack for .045 +/-.020 Dimension - 16 Places
Minitab Analysis Example
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 15
IMPROVE
List bullets of each improvement idea being explored by the team

List bullets of each improvement idea completed by the team

List bullets of improvement ideas currently in the process of being
implemented with a status

Show illustrations of the tools used to drive improvement. For example:
Fishbone Diagram analysis
Design of Experiments
Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis
etc.
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 16
CONTROL
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Describe the Mistake-Proofing devices implemented into the
process designed to control the variation, such as:

LEVEL I: Physical devices designed into the process that prevent
an error from happening at the source.

LEVEL II: Warning devices such as Control Charts for SPC Key
Characteristics identified for a particular process step, buzzers,
alarms, etc., that depend on a human reaction for mistake-proofing
effectiveness.

LEVEL III: Methods implemented that detect a nonconformance
prior to shipping it to the Customer.
F/N=L:\HS\COMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAM\ACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL\PM & STANDARD WORK\DMAIC Project Template.ppt
Page 17
Lost Cost Savings - The Final Result
DEFINE
MEASURE
ANALYZE
IMPROVE
CONTROL
1
2
3
4
5
Cost Avoidance
Scrap dollars prevented in the future
Warranty costs avoided into the future
Etc.

Customer Satisfaction