Reducing_Learning_Curve_in_LB_GB_Sujith

Green Belt Project

Reducing Learning Curve of New Hires in Supplemental Keying Lockbox

Project Title : Reducing Learning curve of New Hires

Green Belt Candidate : Sujith Kolath

LOB/Division : Lockbox

Sponsor : Rajesh Balaraju

Deployment Champion : Rajesh Balaraju

Coach (BB/MBB) : Amir Nair

QPC ID : 23401

Core Process: : Supplemental Keying Lockbox

Basic Project Info

2

Define

Project Charter

SFO Type 1 23401LockboxSujith Kolath Reducing Learning Curve Amir Nair Rajesh V Balaraju

Project ScopeBusiness Case / Case for Change

Problem / Opportunity Statement

Role Name Role

Project Champion Rajesh V Balaraju Delivery Leader

Finance Certifier

Project Coach Amir Nair BB

Project Leader Sujith Kolath Manager

Nishant Team Leader

NA

Rajesh V Balaraju Delivery Leader

Rajeshwari MI Analyst

Team Member Bhagya SME/TD

Team Member Timothy Team Leader

Team Member

Project Charter

Project Goal Statement Project Team

Team Member

Process Owner

The Lockbox process handles supplemental keying for 7 sites across the US. The

BACS team currently works 3 shifts providing 24x7 coverage.

As a process Lock Box has to achieve a minimum of 1.37 Million Key

strokes/FTE/Month which is critical to meet the customer requirement.

To achieve this every associate post 13 weeks of Go-Live Date needs to achieve 8400

KSPH.

Currently the new hires are able to achieve 5122 KSPH post 13 weeks. The project

team would focus on reducing the learning curve of new associates and help them

achieve 6000 KSPH in week 14 - 17 post Go-Live date.

Reducing the learning curve would result in additional 9.5 Million Keystrokes generated

with the 60 FTE ramp-up.

Is:

- Supplemental Lockbox

- Hyderabad

- Associates less than 17 weeks post go live date

Is Not:

- All Other Processes

- Other Sites ( eg: Atlanta / Dallas / Chicago)

- Associates greater than 17 weeks post go live date

The goal is to improve KSPH for New Hires Associates (post 13 weeks of Go-Live

Date) in Week 14 – 17 from 5122 (12 batches in 2007) to 6000 by Nov 2008. This is a

17% increase over the current performance.

Currently the average KSPH of New Hires Associates (post 13 Weeks of Go-Live Date) from Week 14 to Week 17 is 5122 for 12 batches in 2007 as against a target of

8400.

4

Project Plan & Tracker

TRUE 2008

Start Finish Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Task 5

Task 4

Analyze

Task 1

7/28/2008 8/24/2008

Task 2

Task 3

Phase

6/16/2008 6/29/2008

6/30/2008 7/27/2008Measure

Define

8/25/2008 9/14/2008

Control

Improve

9/15/2008 11/9/2008

Base level Target Year Benefit

Productivity KSPH 5122 6000 Nov-08 9519223 Keystrokes

CTQ Unit

AugustJulyJuly 3rd, 2008

Control

NovemberSeptember

Define Measure Analyze Improve

Tollgate Status

CTQ's and Metrics Benefits Forecast

Project Plan Summary

5

CTQs & Family of Measure

6

SIPOC

Customer Output Process Input Supplier

• LOB Partners • New Hires Associates achieving productivity target

• New Hire Hiring • NH Training • Training Material • NH Coaching

• HR

• Trainer

• FLMs / Managers

Associates get Hired Associates go through

1 Week of Process Training

Associates move into complete production

and needs to hit a target of 8400 KSPH

Associates go into OJT for 13 Weeks

Start Stop

Associates to go through 8 days of

pre-process training

7

Current Scenario 6000 KSPH is achieved in week 25-26. Plan to reduce the learning curve by 2 Months.

Primary Metric

8

DPMO for 12 Batches

Saved Keystroke for 12 Batches

PTU for 12 Batches

Secondary Metric

• DPMO includes external/internal errors

• Huge reduction in DPMO from Month1 to month 4 is due to associates moving out of review.

• PTU is consistent from month 2 to month 4.

• Saved Keystrokes has been consistent from month 2 to month 4.

9

Secondary Metric

• Saved Keystrokes has been consistently improving week on week.

• The initial dip in Saved Keystrokes is due associates getting comfortable with the system

Secondary Metric- Saved KS%

20

25

30

35

40

Week

Save

d KS

%

Result 27 29 30 31 32 34 32 32 32 34 33 34 33 33 34 33 34 33 33 33 34 34 32 34 33 34

Goal 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 34

Wk

1

Wk

2

Wk

3

Wk

4

Wk

5

Wk

6

Wk

7

Wk

8

Wk

9

Wk

10

Wk

11

Wk

12

Wk

13

Wk

14

Wk

15

Wk

16

Wk

17

Wk

18

Wk

19

Wk

20

Wk

21

Wk

22

Wk

23

Wk

24

Wk

25

Wk

26

10

75006500550045003500

95% Conf idence Interv al f or Mu

54005300520051005000490048004700

95% Conf idence Interv al f or Median

Variable: Month 4

4700.63

742.38

4889.56

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5339.05

1078.72

5356.20

7375.00

5682.50

4969.00

4513.00

3385.00

57

0.186992

0.547178

773231

879.34

5122.88

0.112

0.603

95% Confidence Interval for Median

95% Confidence Interval for Sigma

95% Confidence Interval for Mu

Anderson-Darling Normality Test

Descriptive Statistics

Data for Week 14 to Week 17

KSPH is at 5122 for 12 batches of 57 Associates. No Significant Difference in KSPH post removing Top and Bottom 5% Performers

Primary Metric Descriptive Stats

6800630058005300480043003800


5300520051005000490048004700


Variable: Data

4722.08

564.29

4899.67

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5308.95

838.34

5279.03

6736.00

5639.00

4969.00

4524.00

3824.00

51

-6.0E-01

0.365355

454830

674.41

5089.35

0.069

0.685






Data without top & bottom 5% performers

11

Learning Curve Trend

12

There is a volume dip from Oct to Feb however sufficient volume for associates to process across all months

Volume Trend for 2 Years

13

Cost Benefit Analysis

* Approximate 7 FTE benefit 14

Measure

MOM of Define Toll Gate

16

As Is Process Map - Hiring

Yes

Line Manager

Offer Letter

STOP

Yes

No

Start

Essay Writing

Aptitude Test

Apply after 3 months

Yes

No

No

Typing Test

HR Interview

No

Yes

No

Yes 17

As Is Process Map - Pre Process

START

Language

Proficiency

Sentence

Structure

Articles

Subject-Verb

Agreement

Activities

Relevant use

of

prepositions

Practice

exercises for

Reading &

Comprehensi

on

Types of

Tenses

Reading &

Comprehensi

on

Tips on how

to draw

answers from

a given

document

Exercises for

speed reading

Analytical

Skills

Importance of

Analytical

skills

brainstorming

Definition &

Application of

Analytical

skills at work

Tools used for

Analysis with

exercises

Expectation

setting for a

Corporate

environment

Etiquette &

Grooming

Transitioning

from Campus

to Corporate

Do’s & Don’ts

for a business

environment

Typing

Business

writing & E

mail skills

Practice

exercises

Alpha-

Numeric

typing and

keyboard

skills

Overview of

the structure

of a formal

email

Active and

Passive Voice

Punctuation

and Spelling

STOP

18

As Is Process Map - Process training

HIPAA

Test

N

Lockbox Operations

in detail (Scanning &

Workflow)

Login Procedures

Vicor 7 sites

Login Methods

Unix Screen

Supplemental

RIDS Screen

ID Request

Briefing on Workfiles Workfiles

Types of Checks

Types of TID

Start

Hierarchy

Overview of

Lockbox

Process Map

HIPAA

SOP

Training

Quiz

F11 Codes

Universal Keyboard

Functions

Types of Keying

Assistant (ICR)

CTQs & Operation

Metrics

Training on Sensitive

lockboxes

Session with

Reviewers

Overview of ALP

(AML, COE, IP) &

MYG

SOP Test

Y N

Vicor System

Login

STOP STOP

ALP Course

NT System

password setup

Vicor system

password setup

19

As Is Process Map - OJT

Start

Vicor ID

testing (All

sites)

Refresher

Sessions

Keying under

internal review

Buddy up with

tenured keyers

Refresher

Sessions/SOP

tests

Feedback &

Coaching

BAU

Alignment to

teams

Stop

20

Cause & Effect Diagram

21

Prioritization Matrix

Key Focus Areas

for this project

22

Cause and Effect Matrix

23

Pareto of Cause and Effect Matrix

All these inputs

are a part of the

Hiring / Training /

OJT Processes

24

Measurement System Analysis

MSA is not applicable since the KSPH is System Generated Data 25

Data Collection Plan

26

Process Capability

27

• Remittance documents

and envelopes are

imaged

• Supplemental key

entry from images of

client specific

requested data

elements

Mail processing Extraction station

• Dollar amounts

keyed from images

• All items encoded

Checks

to item

processing

• Negotiability review

• Check scanning • Mail sorted to

lockbox level

Check

encoding

Image capture Lockbox

database

• Information to

DDA

• Availability

assigned

• Output file

Client information

deliverySoutheastern Industrial Co.

PO Box 277654

Atlanta, GA 30384-7654

303847654

33¢rprises

42141

Paper

12,787.50

23456

Data

Data

Data

Checks and data Checks

• Online

reports

• Online

images

• CD-ROM,

image

transmission

West Enterprises

Glasgow, KY 42141

Sou

PO

Atla

33¢

• Remittance documents

and envelopes are

imaged

• Supplemental key

entry from images of

client specific

requested data

elements

Mail processing Extraction station

• Dollar amounts

keyed from images

• All items encoded

Checks

to item

processing

• Negotiability review

• Check scanning • Mail sorted to

lockbox level

Check

encoding

Image capture Lockbox

database

• Information to

DDA

• Availability

assigned

• Output file

Client information

deliverySoutheastern Industrial Co.

PO Box 277654


303847654

33¢rprises

42141

Southeastern Industrial Co.

PO Box 277654


303847654

33¢rprises

42141

Paper

12,787.50

23456

Data

Data

Data

Checks and data Checks

• Online

reports

• Online

images

• CD-ROM,

image

transmission

West Enterprises

Glasgow, KY 42141

Sou

PO

Atla

West Enterprises

Glasgow, KY 42141

Sou

PO

Atla

33¢

Activity of Product

Activity of the Associate

28

Activity of Associate & Equipment

Activity of Equipment

Keyboard / Monitors

Chair

Soft Board / Lighting

Data Point: 12

4 Associates (1 Tenured, 3 New Hires)

1 Auditor 29

Quick Hits

Issues Action Status

The arm rest for chairs being removed by few associates

All chairs have been replaced without the provision of removing arm rest Closed

Clarity of LCD monitors VS CRT monitors

31 new workstations with LCD monitors and 11 to be replaced from stock Closed

HP keyboard Not Effective All Keyboards changed to TVS keyboard Closed

Dull appearance of soft boards Facelifting for Lockbox Floor Closed

Lack of short cut key usage amongst New Hires Standardizing Usage of Shortcut Keys On Going

High Defer Time Steps reduced in defer procedures Closed

Reducing the Login time to sites WIP

30

The time taken to defer a case

has improved from 36 Secs to 15

Secs which is a 58%

improvement on existing

process

Improving Defer Time for Associates

31

Standardizing Usage of Shortcut Keys

Benchmarking Activity

32

Potential X’s

Xs Test

Typing scores Moods Median

Interviewer One Way Anova

Prior Work Experience Moods Median

Production Time During OJT Correlation-Regression

PKT Scores One Way Anova

Training Scores One Way Anova

R&R During OJT SME Feedback

FLM Alignment Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis

OJT Shift Schedule Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis

Saved Keystrokes % 2 Sample T test

Customer Instructions SME/Reviewer Feedback

33

Analyze

Analyze Summary

Xs Test Result

Typing scores Moods Median Critical

Interviewer One Way Anova Critical

Prior Work Experience Moods Median Critical

Production Time During OJT Correlation-Regression Not Critical

PKT Scores One Way Anova Critical

Training Scores One Way Anova Not Critical

R&R During OJT SME Feedback Critical

FLM Alignment Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis Not Critical

OJT Shift Schedule Wilcoxon/Kruskal-Wallis Not Critical

Saved Keystrokes % 2 Sample T-test Critical

Customer Instructions SME/Reviewer Feedback Critical

35

• The data is not normal and we are using Moods Median to test significance.

• P value is 0.001 and this implies that typing scores during hiring has a critical impact on the KSPH.

• Associates hired at typing scores below 10000 had an average score of 4744 KSPH as compared to associates with 5477 KSPH who were hired above 10000 score.

75006500550045003500


59005800570056005500540053005200


Variable: Month 4

5311.16

475.46

5232.18

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5806.81

971.60

5888.65

7375.00

5819.50

5477.00

5249.00

4524.00

17

3.46627

1.12419

407554

638.40

5560.41

0.128

0.556





Typing Statu: Yes


Potential X1-Typing Scores

75006500550045003500


530052005100500049004800470046004500


Variable: Month 4

4513.95

749.49

4648.33

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

4932.15

1189.37

5252.67

7158.00

5285.25

4743.50

4481.25

3385.00

38

0.388154

0.863101

845147

919.32

4950.50

0.001

1.416





Typing Statu: No


People hired externally had to have a Keying Speed of 7000-8000. This was based

of the speed that was required for the process

when it was migrated. Over 4 years the overall targets had changed several times however the hiring scores

were not revised consistently with change in

time. When we ran the analysis the associates who had joined us with higher typing speed were doing a better job of meeting the ramp up numbers. This

prompted us to revise the JD (Hiring Req – details)

36

Va

msi

Su

ch

ari

ta

So

rab

h

Oth

ers

Bir

en

de

r

7500

6500

5500

4500

3500

Interviewer

Mo

nth

4

Boxplots of Month 4 by Intervie

(means are indicated by solid circles)

• The data is normally distributed for the 5 interviewers. Analysis indicates significant difference between interviewers.

• P-value is 0.019 and indicates interviewer 4 shows a significant difference from the others.

• There has been a significant difference between interviewers who were SMEs in the process compared to new people or T3 supervisors.

Potential X2-Interviewers

75006500550045003500


5900540049004400


Variable: Month 4

4517.78

403.70

4580.16

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5826.18

1242.71

5601.09

6076.00

5684.00

4977.00

4528.75

4500.00

8

-1.12182

0.636285

372815

610.59

5090.63

0.254

0.412





Interviewer: Vamsi


75006500550045003500


500045004000


Variable: Month 4

3824.00

248.71

3909.36

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

4969.00

1192.86

4940.24

4969.00

4746.50

4507.00

4062.00

3824.00

5

1.19289

-3.3E-01

172322

415.12

4424.80

0.584

0.242





Interviewer: Birender


75006500550045003500


580053004800


Variable: Month 4

4866.35

748.98

5111.31

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5857.52

1276.44

5829.31

7375.00

6050.00

5477.00

4783.00

3600.00

29

-2.6E-01

0.215052

890753

943.80

5470.31

0.791

0.229





Interviewer: Sucharita


75006500550045003500


6000500040003000


Variable: Month 4

4074.00

321.20

3216.16

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5284.00

3877.15

6281.17

5284.00

5284.00

4888.00

4074.00

4074.00

3

-9.6E-01

380585

616.92

4748.67

0.476

0.233





Interviewer: Others


75006500550045003500


520047004200


Variable: Month 4

4365.36

508.90

4232.73

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5131.32

1219.73

5145.61

6120.00

5133.75

4652.50

4363.50

3385.00

12

0.783134

0.117384

516079

718.39

4689.17

0.774

0.223





Interviewer: Sorabh


37

• The data is not normal and explain the difference between people with prior work experience and skill sets.

• P value is 0.022 implies that prior work experience in similar field has an impact on productivity.

Potential X3-Experience Status

75006500550045003500


5700560055005400530052005100500049004800


Variable: Month 4

4847.99

576.61

4982.59

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5639.01

956.21

5501.22

7158.00

5786.25

5249.00

4732.75

3920.00

32

0.170601

0.302387

517297

719.23

5241.91

0.886

0.194





EXP Ststus: Yes


75006500550045003500


550050004500


Variable: Month 4

4509.38

816.31

4538.98

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5122.15

1454.38

5402.06

7375.00

5442.50

4647.00

4488.50

3385.00

25

0.375380

0.916841

1092960

1045.45

4970.52

0.005

1.134





EXP Ststus: No


There was no specific requirement of experience

as a part of the Hiring Criteria. However SME expertise identified that people with prior work

experience especially with keying background had

higher speed when compared to associates

with no experience.

38

Ye

s

No

7500

6500

5500

4500

3500

PKT Ststus

Mo

nth

4

Boxplots of Month 4 by PKT Stst

(means are indicated by solid circles)

Potential X4-PKT Scores

The data is normal and explains the difference in performance between people above and below 80%. P value is 0.021 implies a significant impact due to

knowledge levels during OJT.

75006500550045003500


5700560055005400530052005100500049004800


Variable: Month 4

4810.88

687.29

4961.33

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5516.95

1171.31

5620.19

7375.00

5913.00

5152.00

4585.50

3824.00

29

0.230012

0.809813

750061

866.06

5290.76

0.085

0.641





PKT Ststus: Yes


75006500550045003500


515050504950485047504650455044504350


Variable: Month 4

4374.69

598.10

4385.09

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

4903.22

1110.96

5074.45

6120.00

5493.50

4574.50

4264.50

3385.00

22

-6.3E-01

0.288395

604358

777.40

4729.77

0.227

0.467





PKT Ststus: No


Historical PKT was not given too much of weightage. There was a process of a pen & Paper based test that got conducted when the associates were part of the training. Incase the associates failed to score a 80% a feedback was provided and then the issue was

closed. There was no closed looping mechanism to validate if the associates had improved before being sent to the production floor

PKT Tool Launched to ensure regular

PKTs for associates in and

post training

39

• The data is not normal and describes the performance of people as against the training scores.

• P- value is 0.509 indicates no significant difference in performance between people above and below 90% (post training scores)

Potential X5-Training Scores

75006500550045003500


5550530050504800


Variable: Month 4

4694.81

656.90

4844.27

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5406.63

1119.52

5474.01

7375.00

5682.50

4888.00

4513.00

3600.00

29

0.657199

0.830026

685207

827.77

5159.14

0.038

0.781





Post Trainin: Yes


75006500550045003500


550050004500


Variable: Month 4

4566.72

745.99

4719.45

Maximum

3rd Quartile

Median

1st Quartile

Minimum

N

Kurtosis

Skewness

Variance

StDev

Mean

P-Value:

A-Squared:

5545.41

1284.29

5451.19

7158.00

5766.50

5073.50

4494.75

3385.00

28

-6.4E-03

0.401307

890279

943.55

5085.32

0.736

0.245





Post Trainin: No


When associates finish their Process Training a test is conducted to check their knowledge level & the amount of information they have been able to grasp. This is tested through the training Scores.

40

Potential X6-Production Time during OJT

Correlations: Month 4, Prod Time 3 Month

Pearson correlation of Month 4 and Prod Time 3 Month = -0.026

P-Value = 0.847

Regression Analysis: Month 4 versus Prod Time 3 Month

The regression equation is

Month 4 = 5465 - 2.7 Prod Time 3 Month

Predictor Coef SE Coef T P

Constant 5465 1774 3.08 0.003

Prod Tim -2.73 14.11 -0.19 0.847

S = 887.0 R-Sq = 0.1% R-Sq(adj) = 0.0%

Analysis of Variance

Source DF SS MS F P

Regression 1 29397 29397 0.04 0.847

Residual Error 55 43271545 786755

Total 56 43300942

• (R-Sq of 0.1%) describes the amount of variation in the performance of the associates that is explained by the production time of the associates

• This implies that the Production Hrs in the training period has “NO” impact on the productivity of the associate once they go BAU, which is further implied by the p Value being > 0.05

One of the thoughts that came out of the brainstorming

session was that the amount of time that the associates spent processing during the training

period would help them in improving their speed. On an average associates spend 125

Hrs in during the learning curve

41

FLM Alignment

Aravapalli C Sekhar

Briender Singh Thakur

Jacqueline A Rodrigues

Kiranmai Nara

Konete Radhika

Nayakawadi Bhagyawathi

Nishant Gupta

Pushpalatha Mungara

Rama Krishna Chitrapu

Shaik A Ahmed

Shailendra G

Shilpa S Kankipati

Sorabh Kulshrestha

Srinvas Chary M

Timothy J Kusuma

Level

5

4

5

5

4

4

4

7

1

3

5

4

1

4

1

Count

153.000

171.500

86.000

154.000

132.000

147.000

71.500

156.000

54.000

60.000

189.000

137.000

37.000

83.000

22.000

Score Sum

30.6000

42.8750

17.2000

30.8000

33.0000

36.7500

17.8750

22.2857

54.0000

20.0000

37.8000

34.2500

37.0000

20.7500

22.0000

Score Mean

0.212

1.718

-1.650

0.240

0.484

0.953

-1.375

-1.131

1.489

-0.947

1.227

0.640

0.456

-1.015

-0.395

(Mean-

Mean0)/Std0

15.8294

ChiSquare

14

DF

0.3239

Prob>ChiSq

1-w ay Test, ChiSquare Approximation

Small sample sizes. Refer to statistical tables for tests, rather than

large-sample approximations.

Wilcoxon / Kruskal-Wallis Tests (Rank Sums)

• The data is not normal and describes the performance of people as against the FLM respective FLM Alignment.

• P- value is 0.323 indicates no significant difference in performance between people aligned to different FLMs.

42

OJT Shift Schedule

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

7500

Mo

nth

4

Shift 1 Shift 2 Shift 3 Shift 4 Shift 5

Shift Wise - Ist Month

All Pairs

Tukey-Kramer

0.05

Shift 1

Shift 2

Shift 3

Shift 4

Shift 5

Level

16

7

8

16

10

Count

454.000

243.000

318.000

419.000

219.000

Score Sum

28.3750

34.7143

39.7500

26.1875

21.9000

Score Mean

-0.169

0.960

1.964

-0.790

-1.479

(Mean-

Mean0)/Std0

6.4974

ChiSquare

4

DF

0.1650

Prob>ChiSq

1-w ay Test, ChiSquare Approximation

Wilcoxon / Kruskal-Wallis Tests (Rank Sums)

• The data is not normal and describes the performance of people as against the shifts the associates were scheduled in month 4.

• P- value is 0. 165 indicates no significant difference in performance people across all 5 shifts.

43

Saved Keystrokes%

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

7500

Mo

nth

4

No Yes

Saved KS Status

All Pairs

Tukey-Kramer

0.05

Yes-No

Assuming unequal variances

Difference

Std Err Dif

Upper CL Dif

Lower CL Dif

Confidence

512.52

251.52

1024.01

1.02

0.95

t Ratio

DF

Prob > | t|

Prob > t

Prob < t

2.037678

33.38428

0.0496 *

0.0248 *

0.9752 -1000 -500 0 500 1000

t Test

3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500

3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 7500

Location

Dispersion

Type

µ

s

Parameter

5446.5714

998.66354

Estimate

4991.9852

764.03666

Lower 95%

5901.1576

1442.1395

Upper 95%

Parameter Estimates

Shapiro-Wilk W Test

0.932427

W

0.1540

Prob<W

Note: Ho = The data is from the Normal distribution. Small p-values reject

Ho.

Goodness-of-Fit Test

Fitted NormalLocation

Dispersion

Type

µ

s

Parameter

4934.0556

753.47761

Estimate

4679.1154

611.13181

Lower 95%

5188.9957

982.86486

Upper 95%

Parameter Estimates

Shapiro-Wilk W Test

0.953103

W

0.1309

Prob<W

Note: Ho = The data is from the Normal distribution. Small p-values reject

Ho.

Goodness-of-Fit Test

Fitted Normal

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Std

De

v

No Yes

Saved KS Status

No

Yes

Level

36

21

Count

753.4776

998.6635

Std Dev

623.8951

798.9388

MeanAbsDif

to Mean

617.7778

772.0952

MeanAbsDif

to Median

O'Brien[.5]

Brown-Forsythe

Levene

Bartlett

F Test 2-sided

Test

2.9771

1.1379

1.8025

2.0589

1.7567

F Ratio

1

1

1

1

20

DFNum

55

55

55

.

35

DFDen

0.0901

0.2907

0.1849

0.1513

0.1411

p-Value

Welch Anova testing Means Equal, allowing Std Devs Not Equal

4.1521

F Ratio

1

DFNum

33.384

DFDen

0.0496 *

Prob > F

2.0377

t Test

Tests that the Variances are Equal

• The data is normal and describes the performance of people and the impact of saved KS % above and below 34% ( Considering 34% being the process target)

•P- value is low indicates a significant difference in performance of people with the difference in saved keystrokes%. Increase in saved KS impacts the KSPH negatively and Vice Versa.

44

List of all Vital Xs and Root Causes for Action Plan

45

Improve

Project Goal - Rebase lined

47

•KSPH Goal base lined since the target changed from Total KS to 900000 Manual KS/FTE and also addition of new Lockboxes with change in

Complexity. This would equate to 6377 KSPH.

Improve Summary

48

JD revised to meet Experience & Keying Standards

Training curriculum to include short cut keys module

Mandatory refresher session on VICOR post 1 week of keying

Redesigned & Regularized PKT

Process Updates Dissemination procedure put in place

Interviewers work shop to drive calibration

Interviewer Selection Criteria Created

Controls designed to create selection of suitable profiles

Designed R&R for New Hires

4000 Lockbox instructions were streamlined

Operational Observations

Significant Improvement in KSPH

Vital X1-Typing Scores

8000 KSPH 0-12 Months/ No

Prior Work Exp

10000 KSPH 0-18 Months with

Prior keying Exp

Qualification Experience

Befo

re

Aft

er

Hiring Requests

Criteria for hiring changed from 8000

KSPH to 10000 KSPH

Changes in JD communicated to HR

Communicated phased ramp-up plan with

timelines to the LOB

Staffing team and Ops line adherence to

mentioned criteria

The Data is not normal & Mood’s-Median

test used to test for significance

Median of Typing scores moved from 9475

to 11785

Vital X2- Interviewers

50

Designated interviewers selected post interviewing

skills training Changes in JD communicated to HR

AM’s & TL’s with considerable process experience

only eligible for interviewing

Clearance of interviewed candidates post sign off

by Manager

The Data is Normal & describes the Performance

of people

Test of Equal Variance performed on KSPH. The P

Value is 0.817

Mean of KSPH for associates hired by designated

interviewers is 5247 from 5138 which was the pre-

improvement stage

Vital X3- Experience Status

51

JD revised to include prior keying experience

Changes in JD communicated to HR

Manager and Interviewers calibrated

Filtered profiles to exclude nil keying experience or

post-graduates

The Data is not normal and explains the difference

between people with prior work experience

Median of work experience moved to 1.60 years

(post status). The Pre Status Median is 0

The Pre Status Mean is 1.02 years as there were

associates with very high exp. hired

Before After

Vital X4- PKT Scores

52

PKT’s conducted on a monthly basis for new hires

and quarterly for all associates

Online PKT’s introduced

Test contents prepared by core team in consensus

with the reviewers

Process Updates Dissemination procedure put in

place

Before After

Vital X – Saved Keystrokes %

53

Included Shortcut Keys in Training Curriculum

Refresher Sessions on VICOR post 1 week of

keying by Process SME’s & Trainers

Weekly Refresher Sessions on New Lockboxes by

reviewers

The Data is normal and describes the performance

of people is significant

Test of Equal Variance performed. P-Value is low

(0.016) and signifies a difference in pre and post data

Mood’s- Median test performed. Median moved

from 31.24 to 33.05

Vital X – Customer Instructions

54

Refer Document for

SOP of scrubbing

Customer

Instructions

Customer Instructions scrubbed to get into

specified format

Shortened any verbiage where appropriate (e.g.,

Account Number to Acct #)

Befo

re

Aft

er

8400

6377

5121

Improve - KSPH Trend

55

5122

Review Panel Recommendations

56

To check the process KSPH shift for Tenured

associates

Compare the Define and Improve phase KSPH

performance

Recommendations KSPH Comparison for Tenured Associates

Pre and Post Phase KSPH Observations

The Mean KSPH for Tenured associates has

moved from 8106 to 7895 after target base lining.

It shows the impact of increased complexity on

KSPH

The Mean KSPH for associates has improved to

5376 post –project as compared to 5172 pre – project

Downward Shift in

Mean for Tenured

associates post

target Base lining

Upward Trend in

KSPH from Pre

Project

57

Review Panel Approval

1 Sample t-Test to prove that the new associates are performing significantly better than the goal

Control

Control Plan

59

Increase in Mean KSPH for

associates in Control Phase

KSPH Trend

60

8400

6377

5122 5376

5525

Improve Pre Project Control

Secondary Metric Trend

61

PT

U

Sa

ved

KS

%

DP

MO

Observations

The Secondary metrics are stable for all batches in the

post project phase

The upward trend in Post Project DPMO as compared

to Pre Project DPMO is due to new lockboxes which were

added to the queue

Legends

Pre Project Post Project

Average: 3.50 Average: 81.82

Average: 31.11

Overlook Errors in

Sensitive lockboxes like

Taylor, SWS and Blue

Shield caused the High

DPMO for this batch

Cost Benefit Analysis

62

Observations

Actual Performance post Project calculated on 24

FTEs in improve and Control

The total Benefit is in terms of Manual Keystrokes

is 2.64 MN

FTE Benefit @ 900000 Manual Keystrokes per

FTE is 3 FTE (Approx.)

Annexure

Review Panel Recommendations

64

Inputs & Observations

Pre and Post Phase KSPH KSPH Comparison for Tenured Associates

Upward Shift in

Mean

Downward Shift in

Mean seen for Tenured

Associates

The KSPH for Tenured Associates (>35 Months) was compared from March 08 (Pre-Phase) and June 08 (Post-

Phase). There was a dip in Mean from 8106 to 7895

The KSPH for the Associates in Learning Curve in June was compared to Associates in Learning Curve during Define

Phase. There is an upward shift in Mean from 5172 KSPH to 5376 KSPH.

Reducing_Learning_Curve_in_LB_GB_Sujith

Documents

ksph associates

project title

ksph post

green belt project

hired associates

project plan summary

bacs team

lockbox process