1. Contract Setup Project 0307-10-001 Black Belt: Rob Vaughn Week 3 Presentation Houston, TX

2. 2 Background – Current Process n e-IKON platform facilitates the auto-creation of a service contract, with equipment order, (setup) by the IBS Sales person at time of new equipment sale. n Auto-creation processing conducted in Oracle Sales On-line Module. n Non-OSO processing requires Manual creation of Service Contract in Contract Module of Oracle. n Currently many contracts are set up manually (Contract Module), not through OSO processing. n 20 personnel in Contract Setup function, Houston and Duluth CCC’s.

3. 3 Project Definition n Problem Statement: 44% of contracts required to be set up manually. Manual creation in Contracts Module requires additional time/contract versus OSO, higher opportunity for errors – manual entries from paper documents, delay in customer entitlements when paper documents incomplete, – time to resolve issues. Project Definition: Reduce the number of contracts requiring manual set up from 44% to 20%. Project Benefits: Reduction in labor costs of Contract setup personnel. Improved customer satisfaction with timely billing and application of entitlements.

4. 4 Project Definition, Cont’d n Financial Benefits: 44% to 20% manual set up service contracts, reduction of 6 FTE, $250k. n Project Metric “Y”: Strategic Goals: Improved customer satisfaction, reduced costs. Y = # of contracts set up manually, reduction from 44% to 20%. n Defect Definition: Manual set up of a service contract. n Leveragability: Project currently applicable to “live e-IKON” South region, Houston and Duluth Processing centers. Leveragability to all Regions going forward, cost avoidance.

5. 5 Project Teams n Project Champion: Debbie Kok n Financial Analyst: Gary Milliren n Team Member representation e-IKON Deployment Sales e-IKON Orders Management e-IKON Contracts Sales Two teams: Houston and Duluth

6. 6 Current Data – Output (Y) n Oracle report based on Contract Creation Date – Total Contract and OSO created per day n Inverse of OSO % per day = Manual % per day n Breakdown of Houston and Duluth CCC processing n Initial data is daily – June 2 through Aug 19, by location (Hou or Atl) n Capability to continue daily data reporting

7. 7 Current Data – Output (Y) n Oracle report based on Contract Creation Date – Total Contract and OSO created per day n Inverse of OSO % per day = Manual % per day n Breakdown of Houston and Duluth CCC processing n Initial data is daily – June 2 through Aug 19, by location (Hou or Atl) n Capability to continue daily data reporting Oracle data provides % manual created contracts per day – Hou and Atl

8. 8 Current Process Capability

9. 9 Hypothesis testing Duluth and Houston Comparison n Houston – 39.7% average manual, std dev of 24.4% n Duluth – 47.6% average manual, std dev of 21.5% n No statistical difference in mean or variation based on processing center (95% CI). 2-t and 2 variance confirmed. n Data is normally distributed n System generated defect % versus processing center/location

10. 10 Team completed steps n Six Sigma discussion/philosophy/change management n Detail Process Mapping, identify inputs causing defect (manual contract preparation) n Identified 21 significant inputs/causes for manual n Cause and Effect analysis/matrix for key variables (significance weighting), FMEA confirmation underway n Inputs categorized as Source or Category n Developed plan and implementation to gather data on inputs

11. 11 Sources of Request for Service OSO n Outside Sales – with Equipment and Service options in configuators Manual Processing n Outside Sales – not OSO capable n OC/OM – original OSO order modified n Contract Sales n Vendor Contracts n 3 rd Party Contracts n ITT Requests n Install Base Changes n OSO Fail

12. 12 Next Steps – Data collection on Inputs n Revise existing Manual (CAP) form, change in Processing: Sales – OM – Contracts. Change Management request pending n Identify Source and Category of Manual Request – Contract Group to record daily data, reason/frequency Sources include: n Outside Sales and Marketplace (non-OSO generated) n Natl Contract Sales n Vendor Sales n 3 rd Party Sales n OC modification to existing OSO equipment order

13. 13 Next Steps – Data on Inputs Categories from Outside Sales, not OSO capable Equipment types: iR 110, equip not in configuator Lease types: Flex, Step Refinance/Term Renewal Addendums/Amendments Add/Chg to existing group Recurring Prof Services Cycle Billing Option exceptions Price exceptions Service exceptions Complex/Large orders Unlike Meters Source/ Category for Manual Contract Request to be indicated on Form and forwarded to Contract group for data collection

14. 14 Perception - Source

15. 15 Perception – OSO not capable

16. 16 Project Issues – next steps n Data Collection on X’s (Source/Categories of why manual and frequency). New Form, process, and routing. Obtain data on inputs n Validate for significant inputs/Pareto real data n Prioritize variables and improvement plan/time/responsible n Discussions of Technology enhancements, capability, costs, and availability to other than Outside sales ( CHOOSE THE CORRECT VARIABLES AND NUMBER OF VARIABLES, BASED ON DATA, TO ACHIEVE 20%) n Data on financial benefits, id current backlog, overtime, %contribution of manual contracts

17. 17 Questions??