Organizations often use a performance metrics system that only provides point to point comparisons. For example, the currently monthly profitability of a business might be compared to last month. Any movement that is not desirable often leads to a search for what happened.
This what-happened investigation can result in the treatment of common cause variability as though it were special cause. Wasteful firefighting often is a result of traditional metric report-outs and nothing positive happens relative to making a metric improve over time.
A 30,000-foot-level predictive reporting methodology addresses this traditional metric reporting format shortcoming. With 30,000-foot-level metric reporting, a predictive statement assessment is made. If a process output performance is stable and the futuristic response is undesirable, this metric desirable shortcoming pulls for the creation of a process improvement effort that enhances the measurement’s response.
Enterprise Performance Reporting System (EPRS) software provides a means to easily create 30,000-foot-level report outs. A statistical shift in the time-series portion of a 30,000-foot-level metric is an indicator that the process output changed, either to the betterment or degradation. When this happens a new predictive process statement can then be made using this software.
Enhanced financial metric reporting can be achieved through the Integrated Enterprise Excellence (IEE) Business Management System. IEE satellite-level metrics report financial metrics from a process point of view.
An enhanced scorecard development process is available through the Integrated Enterprise Excellence (IEE) Business Management System. The IEE system provides among other things scorecard reporting from a process output point of view that includes variability associated with the process.
If you are at the receiving end of fire-fighting activities that are triggered by a late recognition of performance changes, then this topic may be considered as a fire-prevention webinar. In the DMAIC measure phase and analyze phase, we are taught many tools that can assess a process’ performance before working a project. Unfortunately, our organizational leadership does not support using these tools to evaluate routine performance. In this webinar we will show how to use the measure-phase tools (control charting) to perform routine assessments and build a set of rules that trigger an action before a problem occurs, and to use the analyze-phase tools (hypothesis tests) to evaluate if the difference we see between people or departments is real (significant) or just a random difference (non-significant). How much smoother could things operate if we tested our beliefs before we jumped to take action?
Developing business metrics that lead to the right decisions and governance is important for organizations to excel in this competitive world environment. The 9-step Integrated Enterprise Excellence (IEE) business management system provides the system for accomplishing this organizational need.
Developing Business Metrics that Lead to the Right Decisions and Governance Read More »
Organizations need a meaningful process capability analysis report methodology. Traditional process capability indices reports, including Cp, Cpk, Pp, and Ppk, can be confusing and deceiving.
How to Create a Meaningful Process Capability Analysis Report Read More »
The disadvantages out weigh advantages when assessing balanced scorecard pros and cons! Having a balance in organizational scorecards is important but a natural balance, not forced balance, is much more beneficial. In addition, scorecards should give focus on the alignment of its performance scorecard measures to what is done when producing its product and services.
Advantages and Disadvantages of the Balanced Scorecard: Its Pros and Cons Read More »
In Lean Six Sigma, much training effort is spent on conveying the importance of having a measurement system so that consistent and correct decisions are made relative to part quality and other assessments. Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA) and Gage R&R study (Repeatability and Reproducibility) are an integral part of the Lean Six Sigma Black Belt and Green Belt training. It should be the goal of every organization to achieve the three Rs of business; i.e., everyone doing the Right things, and doing them Right, at the Right time. One tool that provides direction for achievement of the three Rs goal is process performance metrics; i.e., a process’ performance report-out should lead to the most appropriate action or non-action. This objective is not unlike an inspection gage MSA, which is to determine if inspectors can adequately determine whether a manufactured component should be accepted or rejected. Because of this performance-reporting need, it would seem that management and practitioners would be assessing how well current scorecard and metric reporting systems are doing from a MSA conceptual point of view. However, this does not seem to be occurring. The question is why do we not examine business metrics and process capability indices reporting from a MSA point of view with the same level of intensity that we do for product quality metrics? This one-hour Webinar will explain more on the magnitude of the issue: we’ll give focus to how Cp, Cpk, Pp, and Ppk process capability indices’ reporting is sensitive to how a given process is sampled; i.e., an MSA issue. A predictive metric reporting system will then be described for overcoming not only the issues of process capability indices but general business-performance scorecards.
Cp Cpk Pp Ppk Calculation and Understanding: A Webinar that Provides Important Details Read More »
Organizations often describe their business performance using a table of numbers, stack bar charts, and/or pie charts. Red-yellow-green scorecards may also be used for an assessment of how well a function is performing relative to established goals. Traditional performance scorecards present historical information for some timeframe with no predictive statement. Business decisions made through the use of these charts are not unlike driving a car by only looking at its rear view mirror. What organizations need is a predictive metric reporting system. This futuristic assessment can then be utilized so that if expected future performance is not desirable, adjustments can be made. This is not unlike making an automobile driving adjustment using a steering wheel or brake/gas pedal, where this mechanical intervention is analogous to incorporating process improvement activities. The described Statistical Business Performance Charting (SBPC) methodology can, for example, reduce firefighting when the performance measurement system replaces organizational red-yellow-green scorecards, which often have no structured plan for making goal-setting improvement objectives. This article describes how organizations can benefit from a SBPC scorecard or dashboard system, which can guide them to the most appropriate performance-measurement system actions or non-actions in both manufacturing and transactional processes.
Enhanced Stoplight Report Template Software Read More »
There is debate whether, in statistical process control (SPC), a data transformation should be considered when constructing an individuals chart. This article shows, using real data, why an appropriate data transformation is very important to determine the best action or non-action to take in both manufacturing and transactional processes at any point in time. Described in this article is also an enhancement to traditional process control charting methodology. The described statistical business performance charting (SBPC) system can, for example, reduce firefighting when the approach replaces organizational goal-setting red-yellow-green scorecards, which often have no structured plan for making improvements. In addition, the methodology provides predictive performance statements. Donald Wheeler and Forrest have a difference of opinion about the need to transform data when a transformation makes physical sense. The reason for writing this article is to provide information on the reasoning for Forrest’s position. Hopefully this supplemental explanation will provide readers with enough insight so that they can make the best logical decision relative to considering data transformations or not.
This article was written as an alternative approach to analyzing non-normal data to that which was presented by Dr. Don Wheeler in a previous Quality Digest newsletter. This article illustrates, from a high level, or 30,000-foot-level, when and how to apply transformations and present results to others so that the data analysis leads to the most appropriate action or nonaction. Statistical software makes the application of transformations simple.
Log Transformation: Non-Normal Data, To Transform Or Not To Transform Read More »
