1. 1

2. Introduction to the “New” ASQ ITEA Team Process Criteria & California Team Excellence Award Program Presented By Vern Goodwalt Lean Enterprise Coach The 3 Point Group Ph: 951-386-6613 ~ Email: vern.goodwalt@t3pg.com ~ Web site: t3pg.com 2

3. What We Will Cover Program Overview Team Participation & Recognition Different Criteria for Problem Solving & Process Improvement Teams Subject Matter of the Criteria’s 5 Sections and Point Values The Criteria’s Three Levels of Detail Criteria Scoring Methodology Using the Criteria as a Project Planning & Management Framework 3

4. Program Overview 4

5. CTEA Program and ASQ ITEA Process Sense 1997 California Council for Excellence’s (CCE) California Team Excellence Award (CTEA) Program is an authorized showcase of the American Society for Quality (ASQ) International Team Excellence Award (ITEA) Process.  The program criteria focus on post team assessment and providing non-prescriptive feedback on Problem Solving and Process Improvement team projects.  The criteria relate to teams using LEAN approaches such as; 5S, Plan-Do-Check-Act, and Six Sigma DMAIC, problem solving and process improvement methodologies, plus 7 Wastes reductions, ASQ Quality Tools and other Lean approaches. 5

6. CTEA Program The program criteria is a time proven Best Practice for planning, management, and measuring the performance of Problem Solving and Process Improvement teams. The CTEA program provides a platform for organizations of all type to showcase their problem solving and process improvement teams. Teams present their project outcomes to a highly trained team of judges that follow a systematic assessment process that result in a non-prescriptive but actionable feedback report. 6

7. CTEA Program (Continued) This is a great product for team management, continuous improvement and for teams to move to their next level of performance. Application of the CTEA criteria follows a step by step approach that fits well with 5S, Plan-Do-Check- Act, Six Sigma DMAIC methodologies, and other LEAN approaches for problem solving and process improvement events. 7

8. CTEA Program (Continued The criteria also aligns well with the application of 7 Wastes, the root of unprofitable activity within the organization and the application of the ASQ Quality Tools for data analysis and performance metrics. The top CTEA team each year is given an opportunity to participate in the final round of the ASQ ITEA Program. Teams come from all over the world to participate in the ITEA competition held at the ASQ World Conference. 8

9. CTEA Program (Continued Over the years, California teams have improved and matured through participating in the CTEA program. As a result, many of the CTEA teams have placed high in the ITEA competition. For example: Boeing C-17 of Long Beach teams have placed at the Gold, Silver, and Bronze levels and HD Supply of San Diego also placed at the Gold level. 9

10. CTEA Participation & Recognition 10

11. Types of CTEA Teams Each year at the CCE Annual Conference, CTEA recognizes Problem Solving and Process Improvement teams for their team projects. 11

12. CTEA Recognizes Teams at Two Levels - Gold Nugget and Gold Rush - Gold Nugget Award Level - Full extent of the criteria applied at the section, item, and item detail question level (5 Sections, 37 Items & 47 item questions to address). Gold Rush Award Level - Use of the criteria applied at the section and item level (5 Sections & 16 item questions to address). 12

13. Gold Nugget Award Teams address the full criteria at the section, item, and item detail levels (47 questions).  Submit a Power Point presentation (no PP slide limit) of their team project.  Speaker notes must be present for each slide to explain the slide content.  Applications and PP presentations must be submitted by September 1.  Teams are judged on their 30 minute live or DVD presentation at various sites throughout California in October of each year.  Teams receive a presentation score and a comprehensive actionable feedback report by mid December. 13

14. Gold Rush Award Teams only address the criteria at the section and item level (16 questions).  No live presentation is required and the slide presentation is limited to 48 (3 per item question) Power Point slides for directly addressing criteria questions.  Speaker notes must be present for each slide to explain the slide content.  Applications can be submitted at any time during the year.  Teams presentations are not scored but teams receive an actionable feedback report within six weeks. 14

15. Criteria for Two Types of Teams Problem Solving & Process Improvement 15

16. Types of Teams There are many types of teams (Lean, Improvement, Six Sigma, Innovation, and Quality Circle, to name a few).  Regardless of the type of team you are or of any team methodology your company may use, teams always focus on one of two things - either Problem Solving or Process Improvement. 16

17. Types of Teams (Continued) Problem Solving teams have a “problem” to solve.  Typically these teams will focus on identifying and eliminating or overcoming “root causes.” Process Improvement teams have a new process to develop or an existing process that needs to be improved.  Typically these teams will focus on identifying and optimizing key process parameters to design or improve an overall process. 17

18. Types of Teams (Continued) Sometimes a team may get confused by the words they use to describe their project.  For example, they may say, “We had a problem: our customers were demanding quicker turn-around time and we needed to improve our processes.”  This is clearly a case where a Process Improvement is needed.  There would be no expectation of a Root Cause unless something had recently caused the turn-around time to get suddenly worse. 18

19. Criteria Differences Only Occurred in Sections 2 & 3 Problem Solving Team SECTION 2 - Current Situation Analysis Current Situation Analysis focuses on how the team analyzed the current situation. 2A. Guiding question: How did the team identify the potential root cause(s)? 2B. Guiding question: How did the team analyze information to identify the final root cause(s)? Process Improvement Team SECTION 2 - Current Situation Analysis Current Situation Analysis focuses on how the team analyzed the current situation. 2A. Guiding question: How did the team identify the potential improvement opportunity(ies)? 2B. Guiding question: How did the team analyze information to identify the final improvement opportunity(ies)? 19

20. Criteria Sections 2 & 3 Differences (Continued) Problem Solving SECTION 3 - Solution Development Solution Development allows the team to demonstrate how they logically moved from the causes to their final choice. 3A. Guiding questions: How did the team identify the possible solutions? 3B. Guiding questions: How did the team select/determine the final solution(s) from the possibilities generated in 3A above? 3C. Guiding questions: How did the team validate the final solution(s)? Process Improvement SECTION 3 - Solution Development Solution Development allows the team to demonstrate how they logically moved from the opportunities to their improvement action(s). 3A. Guiding questions: How did the team identify the improvement actions? 3B. Guiding questions: How did the team select/determine the final improvement action(s) from the possibilities generated in 3A above? 3C. Guiding questions: How did the team validate the final improvement action(s)? 20

21. Criteria Subject Matter of the 5 Sections and Point Values 21 Note: Here we will be using the Problem Solving criteria.

22. Criteria Sections & Score Point Values (Same for Both Problem Solving & Process Improvement Teams) 1.Project Selection Purpose  9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible 2.Current Situation Analysis  6 items @ 4.5 points = 27 points possible 3.Solution Development  9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible 4.Projection Implementation and Results  9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible 5.Team/Project Management & Project Presentation  4 items @ 4.5 points = 18 points possible Total possible points 126 22

23. Section 1. Project Selection/Purpose (9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible) Project Selection/Purpose gives the team a chance to talk about the importance of the project to the organization, potential project stakeholders, and the team itself. Section 1 is divided into three sub- sections:  (1A) allows the team to discuss how the project was selected.  (1B) provides an opportunity for the team to demonstrate the importance of the particular project to the organization.  (1C) gives the team a chance to discuss how potential stakeholders were selected and how those stakeholders might be impacted. 23

24. Section 2. Current Situation Analysis (6 items @ 4.5 points = 27 points possible) Current Situation Analysis focuses on how the team analyzed the current situation.  This includes the processes, data, and information.  This section also covers how stakeholders were involved. The second half of this section covers how the team determined and validated their final root cause(s).  If the organization uses a specific methodology as part of the quality process, the team may want to consider sharing how that methodology was applied to identify the possible and final root causes. 24

25. Section 3. Solution Development (9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible) Solution Development allows the team to demonstrate how they logically moved from the causes to their final choice.  Initially the team should share how they developed a set of possible root causes. From there, the team should share how they arrived at their specific solution(s) that would meet the project objective(s).  Finally, the team should share how they convinced themselves and others that their proposals would be both practical and acceptable to the organization. 25

26. Section 4 Project Implementation and Results (9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible) Project Implementation and Results addresses how the team sought and secured buy-in.  In addition, this section gives the team the chance to discuss the approaches they used to plan for and implement their solution(s).  Finally, this is where the team gets to present the results that were achieved. This should be based on data generated after implementation of the solution(s). 26

27. Section 5 Team/Project Management and Project Presentation (4 items @ 4.5 points = 18 points possible) Team Management and Project Presentation cover the people-resource side of the project.  This ranges from how the most appropriate team members were chosen to how they were prepared for this special assignment.  Organizational assistance to assure project success is covered here. Also covered is how effectively the team communicated with themselves during the life of the project.  Finally, the judges will provide feedback on the overall project presentation. 27

28. The Criteria’s Three Levels of Detail 28

29. Criteria Levels of Detail Section – Item – Item Detail 3 Levels of detail example: 1, 2 &3 Levels of Criteria Detail Section 1 - Project Selection/Purpose (9 items @ 3 points = 27 points possible) Project Selection/Purpose gives the team a chance to talk about the importance of the project to the organization, potential project stakeholders, and the team itself. 1A. Guiding Question: How was the project selected? Either the team or management selected the project. In either case, the process used to select the project must be clear and well stated. As with all team responses, providing specific examples of techniques and data used will strengthen the team’s presentation. 29 Level 1 Level 2

30. Section – Item – Item Detail (Continued) 1Aa. (1) Describe how data and/or tools were used to support the selection, even if the project was assigned to the team, and (2) Explain why these specific tools and/or data were used to select the project. 1Ab. (1) Explain how the project was selected, and (2) Explain why the project was selected: what discerned gap or observed opportunity lead to the launching of this project? NOTE: 1Aa addresses the tools and data used. The emphasis in 1Ab is on the decisions made because of the tool usage/data analysis in 1Aa. 1Ac. Describe the potential stakeholders for the project and how they participated in the selection process. If the stakeholders were not directly involved, then describe how their interests were known and taken into account. NOTE: this should reflect the history of the project. The actual/final stakeholders may be different from the potential stakeholders at the time the project was being defined. The goal here is to be sure that the project was being defined. The goal here is to be sure that the project was not selected in a vacuum without an understanding of the organizational environment. 30 Level 3 Two Part Questions Note: Italicized words in the blue boxes supply supplemental notes. These notes are not part of the criteria, rather it is to help guide the team through the process.

31. Descriptors & Two Part Criteria Identify - Describe - Explain The “descriptors” are terms such as “identify” (what), “describe” (how), and “explain” (the why).  The descriptors are in bold type, and they let the team know the level of detail with which they must address each item.  When there is more than one descriptor, the criteria is a two-part criterion. Each two-part criteria is clearly marked with a (1) and a (2). 31

32. Descriptors & Two Part Scoring Describe - Explain - Identify Example:  1Aa. (1) Describe how data and/or tools were used to support the selection, even if the project was assigned to the team, and (2) Explain why these specific tools and/or data were used to select the 1Ba. Identify the affected organizational goals, performance measures, and/or strategies.  Two-part items must be scored Unclear if a team Meets only one part, regardless of how well the other part was addressed. 32

33. Criteria Scoring Methodology 33

34. Team Scoring The judges evaluate how well the team’s presentation addresses each criteria question. Judges will decide if the team Exceeds, Meets, provides Unclear evidence, or did Not Cover the item at all. Judging Option Score Score for Sections 1, 3, & 4 Score for Sections 2 & 5 Not Covered 0 0 Unclear 1 1.5 Meets Criteria 2 3.0 Exceeds Criteria 3 4.5 34

35. Judges Option Scoring Bases Not Covered - 0 Score Totally missing; the team did not address the criteria requirement. Unclear 1 ( or in 1.5 Sections 2 & 5) Score Touched upon, but not clear. The judges did not have enough information to determine if the team’s approach met, or could meet, the criteria requirements. Meets Criteria 2 (or 3 in Sections 2 & 5) Score Sufficient information is provided to determine that the team’s approach met the criteria requirements. Exceeds Criteria 3 (or 4.5 in Sections 2 & 5) Score The team’s approach goes beyond meeting the criteria and provides additional clarity indicating increased depth, breadth and accuracy in the team’s analysis, actions, and/or conclusions. Integration with other criteria items is apparent and enhances the team’s overall results. A “Best Practice” or “Role Model” approach. 35

36. Using the ITEA Criteria as a Project Planning & Management Framework 36

37. ITEA Based Project Planning & Management Framework Step 1. (Criteria Section 5) Team and Project Management and Project Reporting 5A. How will the team members be selected and how will they be involved throughout the project? 5B. How will the team be prepared to work together in addressing the project? 5C. How will the team be managed in its performance to ensure it is effective as a team? 5D. How often and how will the team prepare for project progress reporting intervals? 37

38. Project Planning & Management Framework (Continued) Step 2. (Criteria Section 1) Project Selection and Purpose 1A. What methods will be used to choose the project? 1B. How will the project support/align with the organization’s goals, performance measures, and/or strategies? 1C. Who are the potential internal and external stakeholders and how might they be impacted by the project? 38

39. Project Planning & Management Framework (Continued) Step 3. (Criteria Section 2) Current Situation Analysis 2A. What approach/process will the team use to identify the potential root causes and improvement opportunities? 2B. How will the team analyze information to identify the final root causes and improvement opportunities, including any appropriate validation? 39

40. Project Planning & Management Framework (Continued) Step 4. (Criteria Section 3) Solution Development 3A. What methods will be used to identify the possible solutions/improvement actions? 3B. How will the final solutions and improvement actions be determined? 3C. What final solutions, improvement actions, validation, and expected benefits will be realized by implementing the team’s solution? 40

41. Project Planning & Management Framework (Continued) Step 5. (Criteria Section 4) Project Implementation and Results 4A. How will the team get buy-in/agreement to achieve the solution’s implementation? 4B. What approaches will be used by the team to implement its solutions and improvement actions, and to ensure the results? 4C. What results are expected to be achieved? 41 See this approach to team project planning and management and other team helps in Best Practices in Team Excellences, Chapter 5, page 93- 116, ASQ Quality Press 2012 by Vern Goodwalt and Laurie Broedling To order go to: http://asq.org/quality-press/display-item/index.html?item=H1421 Or, go to asq.org – key words “team excellence”

42. Q & A 42