Operations Management - Process Design - Drawing And Planning Ltd

Process Analysis Design

Avidor Baruch, Ilan Dee, Devender Sandhu, Boriz Schwatz,Itay Speicher, Matthais WurmboeckOperations Manangement – Bus 272A05.02.11

DrawingAndPlanningProcessDesignAnalysis.pptx 2

Process Analysis Design Project

Company Overview

What Is Planning Permission

Customer Process Flow

Perceived Flaws In The Current Process

Key Recommendations To Improve The

Process

5/2/11


Overview: Drawing And Planning Ltd

New approach to traditional business model

Opened in Feb 2010

First monthly profit in Mar 2011

100,000 web visits in first year

London, UK Office – 7 Full-Time Staff

Plan to open new locations in south London

(end of 2011), and Leeds, Manchester, and

Dublin (all in 2012).5/2/11


Planning Permission:Making A Change To A Property

5/2/11

Planning

Permission

NeededHouse Extensio

n

Loft Conversi

on

Convert A House To Flats

Build A New

House


Commercial & Residential Consultants

Commercial

Shops To Offices

Changing Use Of Shops

New Office Blocks

Residential

Planning Permission

Planning Appeals

Retrospective Planning

5/2/11


Getting Planning Permission In The UK

Planning Permission From Local

Government

Architect

Drawings

Application Form

Neighbor Approval

Aerial Surve

y

Design

Survey

Access Statemen

ts

5/2/11


Competitive Landscape

Architects• Customized• Expensive• Only provides

drawings (no consultancy)

Arkiplan.co.uk

• Standardized• Cheap• Limited

customer interaction (online system)

Consultants

• <30 UK companies

• One person” operations

• Localized• Word of

mouth5/2/11


Drawing And Planning Service Concept

1. Enquiries via telephone/internet2. Use of specialized CAD technicians 3. Cheaper competitors – Need to add value4. Customer approval during process5. Limits on service maximization6. Faster process than doing it yourself7. Use of technology to deliver quality &

speed8. Deliver entire planning package9. Understanding of local planning

regulations5/2/11


Target Customer

Geographically servicing only London

residents.

Customers:

Upper middle class

Lack of technical knowledge to do it

themselves

Perceive the process as time

consuming/expensive

Require an affordable solution

Limited involvement on their part

5/2/11


Standardized Service With Customizations

Standardized Process To Serve

Customer

Process Times Greatly Differ

Depending On Customer & Local

Council

Customizations dependent on client

needs5/2/11


Elements Of The Customer Delivery System

1. Feasibility Study

2. Property Survey

3. Customer Application Approval

4. Customer Payment

5. Application Submission To Council

6. Application Approval Response To

Customer5/2/11


Customer Process Flow Map

5/2/11

Customer Enters

Website

Views Services / Prices / Previous

Work

EmailLive ChatPhone Call

Customer Does Not Accept

Website Visits: 100k / yearI = 183 / year

Quote Provided


Process Flow Map Cont.

5/2/11

Planning Consultant &

Client Establish

Relationship

Consultant

Obtains Client Data

Client Decisio

n To Proceed

60% Decide To ProceedT= 0.4-1 weekAvg = 0.7 week



5/2/11

Consultant Leads Team

To Make Plans

T= 1-3 weeksAvg = 2 weeksConsultant &

Client Communicat

ion

Consultant & CAD

Technician Communicat

ion

Client Decides

Final Plan

PAYMENT



5/2/11

T= 8-12 weeksAvg = 10 weeks95% Success Rate

Paper Work Submitted To Local Council

Plans Reviewed By

Council Planning

Team

Council Decisio

n

Make Amendment

s From Council

Feedback

PLANNING PERMISSION

GRANTED


Little’s Law – Calculating Throughput

I = 110 Per Year

T = 12.7 weeks

R = 0.167 Customers Per Week

5/2/11


Critical Factors In The Process

Overall process time 3-4 months Without this service ( 3-6 months )

Survey ( 3-7 days )• High number of customers / low number of

employees

Outsourcing Drawings (1-3 weeks)• Lower cost and quality / updates made by in-

house staff

Council Submission (8-12 weeks)• Need to ensure first time acceptance of planning

application

5/2/11


Flaws In The Process

5/2/11

Confusing website: too much information / complex

Internet / computer dependent

Team always need training on latest regulations

Poor payment structure

No face-to-face interaction

Missing client interaction of updating in the process


Bottle Neck 1: Specialist Interaction

Consultant & CAD Technician interaction needed at multiple points during the process

Solutions.. Art & Design Schools – simple work, low /

no cost Local CAD specialist - Advanced work

5/2/11


Bottle Neck 2: Council Delays

Application submission to local council takes on average 10 weeks

This is predominantly out of their control as it based on standard council processes

Solutions.. Closer interaction with planning departments Look at ways to get applications pre-

reviewed for suitability5/2/11


Recommendations To Improve The Process

Simple Website - Highlighting Benefits

Investment In IT - To The Cloud

Change Payment Structure – Money Up Front

Increased Client Interaction Throughout

Process

Measure Process Times To Identify Bottle

Necks5/2/11


Conclusion

Company Overview

What Is Planning Permission

Customer Process Flow

Perceived Flaws In The Current Process

Key Recommendations To Improve The

Process

5/2/11


Feedback From Drawing And Planning CEO

“I would like to thank the team for their hard work on this project. I will definitely be looking to implement their insightful recommendations as I grow my company. Based on the feedback provided I have already hired a web designer and we will be launching a new website in the

coming months.”

Jeremy Stein – CEO, Drawing And Planning Ltdhttp://www.drawingandplanning.com5/2/11

Operations Management - Process Design - Drawing And Planning Ltd

Business

planning permission

planning ltdnew approach

client data

valuecustomer approval

local councilplans

standardized service

websitewebsite visits

web visits