1. 4 – 1 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Process Analysis & Quality 4 For Operations Management, 9e by Krajewski/Ritzman/Malhotra © 2010 Pearson Education Homework: 21a (label the complaints a through h), 22

2. 4 – 2 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Process Analysis The documentation and detailed understanding of how work is performed and how it can be redesigned. Simplification. Benchmarking. IT / Automation. Continuous improvement. Tools  Flowcharts  Process charts  Checklists  Bar charts / histograms  Pareto charts  Cause-and-effect diagrams

3. 4 – 3 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Flowcharts No Yes NoYes No Yes Line of visibility Finish Figure 4.2 –Flowchart of the Sales Process for a Consulting Company Payment received? Client billed by accounting, sales, or consulting Follow-up by accounting, sales, or consulting Approval by consulting? Final invoice created by accounting, sales, or consulting Nested Process Client agreement and service delivery Is proposal complete? Follow-up conversation between client and sales Sales and/or consulting drafts proposal Sales: Initial conversation with client Marketing lead Follow-up conversation between client and consulting Consulting drafts proposal Consulting: Initial conversation with client Consulting lead Sales lead

4. 4 – 4 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Step No. Time (min) Distance (ft)    Step Description 1X 2X 3X 4X 5X 6X 7X 8X 9X 10X 11X 12X 13X 14X 15X 16X 17X 18X 19X 0.5015.0 10.00 0.7540.0 3.00 0.7540.0 1.00 60.0 4.00 5.00 2.00200.0 3.00 2.00200.0 3.00 2.00 1.0060.0 4.00 2.00180.0 4.00 1.0020.0 Process Charts Figure 4.5 –Process Chart for Emergency Room Admission Sit down and fill out patient history Enter emergency room, approach patient window Nurse escorts patient to ER triage room Nurse inspects injury Return to waiting room Wait for available bed Go to ER bed Wait for doctor Doctor inspects injury and questions patient Nurse takes patient to radiology Technician x-rays patient Return to bed in ER Wait for doctor to return Doctor provides diagnosis and advice Return to emergency entrance area Check out Walk to pharmacy Pick up prescription Leave the building Summary Activity Number of Steps Time (min) Distance (ft) Operation 523.00 Transport  911.00815 Inspect 28.00 Delay  38.00 Store  ――

5. 4 – 5 Check Sheet, Wellington Fiber Board Headliner Defects Defect type Tally Total A. Tears in fabric//// 4 B. Discolored fabric/// 3 C. Broken fiber board//// //// //// //// //// //// //// / 36 D. Ragged edges//// // 7 Total 50

6. 4 – 6 Relative and Cumulative Percentages, Wellington Fiber Board Defect Type fpP C. Broken Fiber Board 360.72 D. Ragged edges 70.140.86 A. Tears in Fabric 40.080.94 B. Discolored Fabric 30.061.00

7. 4 – 7 Pareto Chart, Wellington Fiber Board Number of defects 100 80 60 40 20 0 50 40 30 20 10 0 Cumulative percentage Defect type C D A B

8. 4 – 8 Cause-and-Effect Diagram, Wellington Fiber Board Out of specification Not available Training Absenteeism Communication Humidity Schedule changes Machine maintenance Machine speed Wrong setup Process People Other Materials Broken fiber board

9. 4 – 9 Histogram, Wellington Fiber Board Number of broken fiber boards FirstSecondThird Shift

10. 4 – 10 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Data Analysis Tools Help identify causes of problems 1)Checklists 2)Histograms and bar charts 3)Pareto charts 4)Scatter diagrams 5)Cause-and-effect diagrams 6)Graphs

11. 4 – 11 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Pareto Chart for a Restaurant EXAMPLE 4.2 The manager of a neighborhood restaurant is concerned about the smaller numbers of customers patronizing his eatery. Complaints have been rising, and he would like to find out what issues to address and present the findings in a way his employees can understand. SOLUTION The manager surveyed his customers over several weeks and collected the following data: ComplaintFrequency Discourteous server12 Slow service42 Cold dinner5 Cramped table20 Atmosphere10

12. 4 – 12 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Pareto Chart for a Restaurant 50 – 45 – 40 – 35 – 30 – 25 – 20 – 10 – 5 – 0 – Failures Discourteous server Slow service Cold dinner Cramped tables Atmosphere Failure Name Figure 4.9 –Bar Chart Figure 4.9 is a bar chart and Figure 4.10 is a Pareto chart, both created with OM Explorer’s Bar, Pareto, and Line Charts solver. They present the data in a way that shows which complaints are more prevalent (the vital few).

13. 4 – 13 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Pareto Chart for a Restaurant Figure 4.10 – Pareto Chart  100% = 69.7% (42 + 20) 89 – 100.0% – 80.0% – 60.0% – 40.0% – 20.0% – 0.0% 45 – 40 – 35 – 30 – 25 – 20 – 10 – 5 – 0 – Failures Discourteous server Slow service Cold dinner Cramped tables Atmosphere Failure Name Percent of Total

14. 4 – 14 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Analysis of Flight Departure Delays EXAMPLE 4.3 The operations manager for Checker Board Airlines at Port Columbus International Airport noticed an increase in the number of delayed flight departures. SOLUTION To analyze all the possible causes of that problem, the manager constructed a cause-and-effect diagram, shown in Figure 4.11. The main problem, delayed flight departures, is the “head” of the diagram. He brainstormed all possible causes with his staff, and together they identified several major categories: equipment, personnel, materials, procedures, and “other factors” that are beyond managerial control. Several suspected causes were identified for each major category.

15. 4 – 15 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Analysis of Flight Departure Delays Delayed flight departures Weather Air traffic delays Other Aircraft late to gate Mechanical failures Equipment Passenger processing at gate Late cabin cleaners Unavailable cockpit crew Late cabin crew Personnel Poor announcement of departures Weight/balance sheet late Delayed check-in procedure Waiting for late passengers Procedures Late baggage to aircraft Late fuel Late food service Contractor not provided with updated schedule Materials Figure 4.11 – Cause-and-Effect Diagram for Flight Departure Delays

16. 4 – 16 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Causes of Headliner Process Failures EXAMPLE 4.4 The Wellington Fiber Board Company produces headliners, the fiberglass components that form the inner roof of passenger cars. Management wanted to identify which process failures were most prevalent and to find the cause. SOLUTION Step 1:A checklist of different types of process failures is constructed from last month’s production records. Step 2:A Pareto chart is prepared from the checklist data. Step 3:A cause-and-effect diagram for identifies several potential causes for the problem. Step 4:The manager reorganizes the production reports into a bar chart according to shift because the personnel on the three shifts had varied amounts of experience.

17. 4 – 17 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Causes of Headliner Process Failures Defect typeTallyTotal A. Tears in fabric4 B. Discolored fabric3 C. Broken fiber board 36 D. Ragged edges7 Total50 | | | | || | ||| || | |||| |||| |||| ||| |||||||| | ||| || C D A B 50 – 40 – 30 – 20 – 10 – 0 – – 100 – 80 – 60 – 40 – 20 – 0 Number of Failures Cumulative Percentage Defect Failure SOLUTION Figure 4.12 shows the sequential application of several tools for improving quality Step 1. Checklist Step 2. Pareto Chart Figure 4.12 –Application of the Tools for Improving Quality

18. 4 – 18 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Causes of Headliner Process Failures SOLUTION Figure 4.12 shows the sequential application of several tools for improving quality Step 3. Cause-and-Effect Diagram Step 4. Bar Chart Humidity Schedule change Other Out of specification Not available Materials Training Absenteeism Communication People Machine maintenance Machine speed Wrong setup Process Broken fiber board 20 – – 15 – – 10 – – 5 – – 0 – Number of Broken Fiber Boards Shift FirstSecondThird Figure 4.12 –Application of the Tools for Improving Quality

19. 4 – 19 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Redesigning the Process After a process is documented, metrics are collected, and disconnects are identified, the process analyst determines what changes should be made People directly involved in the process are brought in to get their ideas and inputs

20. 4 – 20 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Solved Problem 4 DefectFrequency Lumps of unmixed product7 Over- or underfilled jars18 Jar lids did not seal6 Labels rumpled or missing29 Total60 Vera Johnson and Merris Williams manufacture vanishing cream. Their packaging process has four steps: (1) mix, (2) fill, (3) cap, and (4) label. They have had the reported defects analyzed, which shows the following: Draw a Pareto chart to identify the vital defects.

21. 4 – 21 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Solved Problem 4 SOLUTION Defective labels account for 48.33 percent of the total number of defects:  100% = 48.33% 29 60 Improperly filled jars account for 30 percent of the total number of defects: The cumulative percent for the two most frequent defects is  100% = 30.00% 18 60 48.33% + 30.00% = 78.33%

22. 4 – 22 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Solved Problem 4 10% + 90% = 100.00% Defective seals represent of defects; the cumulative percentage is 6 60  100% = 10.00% The Pareto chart is shown in Figure 4.16 78.33% + 11.67% = 90.00% 7 60  100% = 11.67% Lumps represent of defects; the cumulative percentage is

23. 4 – 23 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall. Solved Problem 4 40 – 36 – 32 – 28 – 24 – 20 – 16 – 12 – 8 – 4 – 0 – – 100 – 90 – 80 – 70 – 60 – 50 – 40 – 30 – 20 – 10 – 0 Frequency of Defects LabelFillMixSeal Cumulative Percentage of Defects 100% 90% 78% 48% Figure 4.16 –Pareto Chart

24. 4 – 24 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

25. 4 – 25 Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.