Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical …Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical Management (ITTTM) Courseware Applications, Project Portfolio Template Data Tools

Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical Management (ITTTM) Courseware Applications, Project Portfolio Template

Data Tools (13-18), Regular Critique Assessment’s and Standard Dedicated Audit’s

Regular critique assessments (RCA) and standard dedicated assessments (SDA) are part of ITTTM courseware systems. After reading assigned ITTTM long and short forms, team members do independent research based on RCA’s and SDA’s, posting their RCA/SDA work forms at threads in e-classroom discussion boards. All also are compilers, using all researcher postings, collectively presenting a final portfolio for each tool and at the end of the course. There are three RCA’s repeated/evolved for each tool critique, presented ahead of SDA’s, in the portfolio, as follows:

• Project Portfolio Assessment, Research Methodology, Plan (PPARMP); • Review Of Literature, Documentation Assessment (ROLDA); and, • Portfolio Presentation Management Team Assessment (PPMTA).

This template should be filled in for each assignment, in the order as presented, completed based on individual/team work following instructions in the forms (note, again, all persons on team do work independently for each form, and then all compile one portfolio of forms). Each tool portfolio uses all SDA’s compiled to reflect total team research enhanced over time to address course outcomes, and to do project deliverables for each objective. As each tool portfolio is done, phase work is a “rollover” of work already done in tool portfolios, but enhanced and better focused on project and course objectives and outcomes. This is further explained in Gantt charts below, each separate form steps, documentation in ITTTM courseware, and student project examples at www.bgsu.edu/colleges/technology/qs ).

PROJECT PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT, RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, PLAN (PPARMP) RCA

General Use/Application (done by Team Leadership—note that team leaders rotate continuously just like all other team functions): Part 1 A, B, C, D. Team leaders assign independent and grand form team members RCA and SDA compilation responsibilities, due dates. Part 2 A, B, C, D. Continuously evolve “Project” information, and diagrams, to help explain and connect all aspects of team work. Part 3. FACR—RCA is updated and addressed with each tool/phase based on FACR’s done at specific SDA’s. Part 4. General methodological reflection, based on total completed portfolio, and input from all, to assist all in improving. PART 1. Team leaders prepare threads in discussion board work areas for this tool, where all work can be posted as assigned. All persons on the team should be shown on a line below, given an assignment, corresponding to work posts in discussion board threads. Phase: Tool: Date: Compiler (s), Team Leader: Team:

Researcher 1A. Assigned Forms Due, First Half Posting Cycle

1B. Researcher Independent Work Reviewed By

1C. Grand Form Compiled, Second Half Posting Cycle

1D. Final Compiled Work Reviewed By

Example Joe Smith

ROLDA John Doe 10/8/03 James Hale

PART 2. This section should be expanded and evolved to address and develop parts 2 A, B, C, and D over time to become several pages in length and assist non-team participants (as well as team participants) in understanding the project focus and context. 2 A. Project Background: (ex, number/type persons in systems, recent changes, historical of systems/processes, product information, etc.) 2 B. Project Problem Statement: (ex. how are systems organized and managed to obtain the full benefit of collaborative communication.) 2 C. Project Objectives: (three to maximum six, perhaps provided by customer/consultation with others, continuously refined). 2 D. Project Research Methodology: (how data is gathered, analyzed with SDA’s/RCA’s. Teams do a modified Gantt chart like those below). Part 2 includes three diagrams as follow, all designed to graphically help describe how the project is being done, also continuously evolved.

Part 2 Diagram 1: Project Organizational Chart For Team (illustrate how team is organized to do work)

Part 2 Diagram 2: Facility Layout Of Process/System (illustrate the work area used to complete the project)

Project Team Leadership

Team member Team member Team member

Workers 1, 2, 3 Placed here

Workers 4, 5, 6 Placed here

Work center 2, metal

processing

Work center 3, packaging,

processing

Work center 1, general processing

Part 2 Diagram 3: Flow Chart Of Process (how product or service is produced as part of facility layout) Part 3 A, B, C, and D. Findings, Analysis, Conclusions, Recommendations (FACR) RCA. As each SDA is used and a FACR done for each, the general results and findings from all persons on the team are brought together as general project findings, analyses, conclusions and recommendations for future planning and work. All work should be organized around objectives in project. Researcher 3A. Project objective

(s) written…… 3B. Findings, analyses observed as data, documentation in SDA……

3C. Conclusions, recommendations in methods, course outcomes……

3D. ROLDA, PPMTA, PPARMP relationships?

Researcher Contribution

Collect From All, Compile

Part 4 A, B, C. General Methodological Reflection. Based on the tool and phase portfolio methodologies shown in Gantt chart forms below, all other input from all, what PPARMP issues, and opportunities are we seeing, and how can we best address these to improve and move forward (Note that places for these responses are provided after Gantt charts)? Part 4 A, Tool/SDA Project Methodology, Rollout: Tool/SDA methodology is a planned completion of tools and SDA’s in course and project with each tool and phase portfolio. Relationships to FACR, and tool/phase methodologies are updated with each portfolio, coinciding with rollout of work shown in course syllabus. Final phase II portfolio presentation has 18 tools completed, minimum. SDA 1 and 2 are enhanced ongoing throughout course; SDA 3, 4 and 5 are done as shown below; and other SDA’s may be modified per team methodology (ex: up to two SDA’s used in 3, 4, 5 can be repeated and “grown” and other SDA’s may be used from a different set of tools within the total 42 ITTTM). Are any changes recommended for the rollout at this time, and if yes, what is the basis for the proposed changes?

Tool SDA 1 SDA 2 SDA 3 SDA 4 SDA 5 Other (s) 13 VSPC PASPC GOTA DSDC ISOQSAOPP 14 VSPC PASPC PDCS GSICPC GIS 15 VSPC PASPC VDSRPC GIS cont CEAS 16 VSPC PASPC MSAE CC CEAS cont 17 VSPC PASPC GRARS GRRTTIC OATCAF 18 VSPC PASPC SAGE PSDOE CC cont

Part 4 B, Tool Portfolio Methodology Rollout. Tool portfolio completion in two week posting cycle combines tasks, who should do, and when to complete in relation to all other work. Three tool portfolios are done before phase I and three after, all leading to final phase II compilation (both phases result in a “grand” accumulative portfolio, explained in the next chart). Posting cycle includes all days, and can be done ahead of time. *Astericked tasks are first done by team leader or assistant team leader on a rotating basis, and all coincide with rollout of work in syllabus.

Timeline in Days/Weeks/Months (denoted by color) Task/Action/Step

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

1 0

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

Faculty prepares tool discussion board area

X

Team leadership prepares PPARMP, assigns work*

X

Team leadership prepares threads in work area*

X

SDA’s researched by all, all do all SDA’s

X X X

SDA’s independently posted at threads by all

X X X X

Non-required team chat about work in motion

X X X

SDA’s compiled by team members per PPARMP

X X X X X X

RCA’s independently posted at threads by all

X X X X X X

RCA’s compiled by team members per PPARMP

X X X X X X

Tool portfolio assembled by team leadership*

X X

Tool portfolio reviewed by all on team

X X

Tool portfolio posted by team leadership*

X

Faculty assessment, post in new discussion board

X X

Required team chat about POAM, next tool

X X

Part 4 C, Phase Portfolio Methodology, Rollout.. Phase portfolio completion at mid term and final are completed with all other elements of

Use text to explain symbols…

Text boxes, Auto shapes in MS Word

course. Three tool portfolios are done before phase I, three after, all leading into final phase II compilation (phases result in a “grand” accumulative portfolio). *Startup at outset of course leads into first tool, and all tasks coincide with rollout of work as shown in course syllabus.

Timeline in Days/Weeks/Months (denoted by color) Task/Action/Step

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

1 0

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

*Team prepares startup portfolio, start of course

X X

Team completes first tool portfolio

X X

Faculty assesses portfolio per POAM, requires chat

X

Team completes second tool portfolio

X X


X

Team completes third tool portfolio

X X


X

Team enhances all tools, compiled as grand forms

X X

Phase portfolio reviewed by all on team

X

Faculty assesses phase portfolio, POAM chat

X

Part 4 D. Reflections on Methodology, Plan. Based on completion of work and updates in PPARMP, what are all on the team seeing that may be modified methodologically to improve the deliverables in the project. Researcher 1. Project focus as noted in abstract, problem statement,

objectives, methodology, diagrams, FACR’s, others: 2. Assessment Question and reflective thoughts, Pros and Cons, for use in chats and in other ways, to improve:



Compiler Portfolio Reflections, Summary Of Technical Work, Assessment, Based On Individual Researcher Inputs:

Compiler Reflections To Help Improve Quality Of Work In Portfolio Based On All Individual Researcher Inputs:

Review Of Literature, Documentation Assessment (ROLDA) RCA

General Use/Application (top part): Read tool long and short forms from ITTTM and provide general tool bibliographic information and 300-500 word abstract of the tool in appropriate areas below NOTE: all must do this individually, one on team compiles all work posted). 1. Response 1A, give the main technological concept of the tool. 2. Response 2A, explain how the tool added value to the team project. 3. Response 3A, form a question pertaining to the tool for chat discussion.

General Use/Application (bottom part): Identify an article/source related to the tool, and summarize in 300-500 words (abstract). 4. Response 1B, give the bibliographic source, being careful to cite all details correctly. 5. Response 2B, explain how this article added value to the team project. 6. Response 3B, SDA connection to the article—usually one or two, minimum. Phase: Tool: Date: Researcher: Compiler (s): Team: Information Source (Tool reviewed for this toolkit completion) In Bibliographic Form:

Abstract And Synthesis Of Key Information (usually approximately 300-500 words) completed by compiler (s) based on submissions by all on team as well as their own review of the tool content: Researcher 1A. Main Technological Concept: 2A. Relationship, Value Added, To

Project/Technology: 3A. Assessment Question, Pros And Cons, For Chat:





Article Abstract Of Key Information (usually approximately 300-500 words—each tool submission requires one for each team member) :

Researcher 1B. Bibliographic Source: Author; How To Access; How/Who, Published; Type Source, etc.:

2B. Why Is This Source Relevant; How Does It Add Value (Reflections By Researcher)?

3B. SDA’s Connected:





Portfolio Presentation Management Team Assessment (PPMTA) RCA

General Use/Application (NOTE, all do this independently, and one on team compiles all posted inputs to reflect team collective views): Part 1 A, B, C. Analyze/review SDA/RCA compilations at discussion board threads, open agenda items, actions needed. Part 2 A, B. Based on all work, do Excel numerical ratings for individuals on your team and other teams based on portfolio submissions. General Note: Excel tables are activated by double clicking at table, when using a machine with excel installed. Phase: Tool: Date: Researcher (s): Compiler (s): Team:

Researcher/ Compiler

1A. Technical Project Open Agenda Items, How done, Content Specific?

1B. Presentation Improvement Actions, Management/Organization, Process?

1C. Ongoing Listing, How Issues Were Resolved, Adding Value In PPARMP.

Observ-ation

Collect All, Compile



2A. Analyze/review portfolio management contributions and reflect all in numerical ratings below for persons on your team.

2B. Compare and benchmark work of all teams, numerically below, how all is managed and organized relative to Gantt charts above, to what must be accomplished in PPARMP, and overall outcomes desired in course.

Int ernal Team

A ssessment

General Commun-

icat ion

Threaded Commun- icat ions

Chat Part-icipat ion (non/req.)

SDA/RCA Contribu-

t ions

Writ ing Quality In General

Analysis , Ref lect ion In Writ ing

Format Compliance

+ Details

Data Analysis, Accuracy

Did M ore/Less Than Asked

General Timeliness,

Delivery

Coopera- t ion And Att itude

Leadership, Prof.

Demeanor

Grand Total Per Individual

WORK/RATING (1-10): 1 = low /bad; 10 = high/good; 0 = no contributionM EM BERTeam 1+ 1 8 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 8 2 5.08333up to 12 1 5 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7.25

1 10 8 8 2 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 6.51 10 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6.756 2 6 6 10 10 3 6 6 6 6 6 6.08333

10 4 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1 8 10 8.583334 10 4 4 4 4 1 4 0 4 4 4 3.916674 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 3.754 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 3.916674 9 4 4 5 4 4 4 0 4 4 4 4.166674 7 4 4 1 4 4 10 0 10 10 4 5.166674 9 4 4 4 4 4 10 0 10 10 4 5.58333

TOTAL TEAM AVERAGE 5.5625

Ext ernal Team

A ssessment

General Commun-

icat ion

Threaded Commun- icat ions

Chat Part-icipat ion (non/req.)

SDA/RCA Contribu-

t ions

Writ ing Quality In General

Analysis , Ref lect ion In Writ ing

Format Compliance

+ Details

Data Analysis, Accuracy

Did M ore/Less Than Asked

General Timeliness,

Delivery

Coopera- t ion And Att itude

Leadership, Prof .

Demeanor

Grand Total Per Individual

WORK/RATING (1-10): 1 = low /bad; 10 = high/good; 0 = no contributionTeam NameTeam 1 1 8 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 8 2 5.08333Team 2 1 5 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 7.25Team 3 1 5 8 8 2 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 6.08333Team 4 1 10 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 6.75Team 5 6 2 6 8 10 10 3 6 6 6 6 6 6.25

TOTAL TEAM AVERAGE 6.28333

Continuous Data Tools (13-18) SDA-P Attribute Statistical Process Control (PASPC)

The continuous SDA is developed over the entire course based on what is learned throughout the course. A separate discussion board work area will be set up where applied research can be conducted, systematically, on the continuous SDA’s. Note that it is assigned in the SDA tool/SDA project methodology table provided earlier, and should be assigned to various persons on the team routinely for continuous improvement. At phase review, this SDA should be highlighted and explained based on progress made toward “best practices” and accomplishment of outcomes of the course as reflected in the POAM from the course syllabus. General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issue, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR), completed by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Researcher (s): Compiler (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Supplier: Customer: Product or process:

Inspection/data gathering description: Operation: Part: Part characteristic being analyzed:

Date Time Sample n # def (np) P = np/n Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

UCL = P bar = .

Calculate Sample n = All n Summed, Σn = Calculate Number Defective (np) As All Defectives Summed, Σnp = Calculate P bar = np/n Summed/ Number Of Samples, P bar =

Calculate UCL And LCL = P bar ± 3√ P bar (1-P bar)/n UCL And LCL = (______) ± 3√ (_____) (______)/(_______) UCL = (_______) + 3 (_______) = (_________) LCL = (_______) – 3 (_______) = (_________)

SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective

(s) written…… 2. Findings, analyses observed as data, documentation in SDA……

3. Conclusions, recommendations in methods, course outcomes……

4. PPARMP, ROLDA, PPMTA relationships?





SDA-P Attribute Statistical Process Control (PASPC) EXAMPLE

Part: Example Operator: Example Characteristic: Example Operation: Example

Inspection, Data Gathering Description (Attach Pertinent Information):

Date Time Sample n 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 # def (np) 10 7 6 5 9 8 8 11 12 7 P = np/n .167 .117 .100 .084 .150 .134 .134 .183 .200 .117 Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

.280

.260

.240

.220

.200

.180

.160

.140

.120

.100

.080

.060

.040

.020

UCL = 271 P bar = .138 LCL = .005 .000 Calculate Sample n = All n Summed, Σn = 600 Calculate Number Defective (np) As All Defectives Summed, Σnp = 83 Calculate P bar = np/n Summed/ Number Of Samples, P bar = .138

Calculate UCL And LCL = P bar ± 3√ P bar (1-P bar)/n UCL And LCL = .138 ± 3√ .138 (.862)/60 UCL = .138 + 3 (.0445) =.271 LCL = .138 – 3 (.0445) = .005

SDA-Variable Statistical Process Control (VSPC) EXAMPLE

Part: Example Operator: Example Characteristic: Example Operation:


All second shift values, approximately two per hour. Date Time

1 501 502 497 504 498 499 503 501 495 501 502 503 501 502 498 497 2 502 506 498 503 496 498 502 502 497 502 501 504 502 505 499 498 3 498 510 501 501 490 499 505 503 498 502 500 505 505 506 497 499 4 497 495 502 500 492 501 504 504 499 503 498 507 506 500 498 496

Measure Value

5 494 496 503 501 493 502 503 505 500 504 497 510 500 501 499 495 Sum 2492 2509 2501 2509 2469 2499 2517 2515 2489 2512 2498 2529 2511 2514 2491 2485

Average 498 502 500 502 494 500 503 503 498 502 500 506 503 503 498 497 Range 008 015 006 004 008 004 003 004 005 003 005 007 006 006 002 004 Calculate Grand Mean or X Double Bar = All Averages Summed/n Calculate UCL = X Double Bar + (A2) (R Bar); Calculate LCL = X Double Bar – (A2) (R Bar) Where A2 = .58 Constant Calculate R Bar = All Ranges Summed/n Calculate UCL R = (D4) (R Bar); And LCL R = (D3) (R Bar) Where D3 = 0 And D4 = 2.11 Constants Configure Graphs To Accommodate Values Calculated, And To Fit Within Work Areas, Illustrating Process Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7

UCL = .505 Mean = .501 LCL = .497

6

5

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

UCL R = .01 R Bar = .056 LCL R = 0 2

Continuous Data Tools (13-18) SDA-Variable Statistical Process Control (VSPC)

The continuous SDA is developed over the entire course based on what is learned throughout the course. A separate discussion board work area will be set up where applied research can be conducted, systematically, on the continuous SDA’s. Note that it is assigned in the SDA tool/SDA project methodology table provided earlier, and should be assigned to various persons on the team routinely for continuous improvement. At phase review, this SDA should be highlighted and explained based on progress made toward “best practices” and accomplishment of outcomes of the course as reflected in the POAM from the course syllabus. General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issue, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR), completed by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Researcher (s): Compiler (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date: Part: Operator: Characteristic: Operation:


Date Time

1 2 3 4

Measure Value

5 Sum

Average Range Calculate Grand Mean or X Double Bar = All Averages Summed/n Calculate UCL = X Double Bar + (A2) (R Bar); Calculate LCL = X Double Bar – (A2) (R Bar) Where A2 = .58 Constant Calculate R Bar = All Ranges Summed/n Calculate UCL R = (D4) (R Bar); And LCL R = (D3) (R Bar) Where D3 = 0 And D4 = 2.11 Constants Configure Graphs To Accommodate Values Calculated, And To Fit Within Work Areas, Illustrating Process Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 UCL = X Double Bar = LCL =

UCL R = R Bar = LCL R =SDA-FACR General Use/Application:

o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








Tool 13 SDA-Documentation System Design, Communication (DSDC)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. Compiler (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Researcher Communication Method, Internal And

External Customers: Toolkit/Blackboard Design Element, How Does It Work?

How To Improve Professional Relationships, Communication?

1. 1.

1. 1.

Identify How The Systems’ Design You Are Advocating Can Assist IN Tieing Together PPDPOA, TPMSS, FACR, TRIRPA And Other Elements Of Team Problem Solving And Improvement: Explain ISO/QS Characteristics And Other Necessary Entities To Be Possessed By Documentation And Communication Systems, Categorically, Particularly Focused On Service Functions: Using The Template At The End Of The Applications Complete A Cause And Effect Diagram Indicating Issues And Opportunities For Systemic Documentation Relationships/Improvements, Particularly Focused On Service Functions: Identify And Explain Why Your Organization Is Well Suited To The Documentation And Communication System Being Developed, Particularly Focused On Service Functions: SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








Tool 13 SDA-ISO/QS Audit, Objective Prioritization Plan (ISOQSAOPP)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio.

Compiler (s): Researcher: Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Organization Under Discussion: Current Operation: Location: General Description Of Operations/Production Functions/Systems Being Assessed As An Internal Audit:

ISO/QS Element (TS 16949 2002—Other Standard)

Organization Area/Function Technical Description

Actual Audit Findings/ Preliminary Information

Actions Required, Recommendations For Change

(list each element as a separate category for analysis/audit)

(describe the technical function being audited)

(explain how the area/function compares to the standard)

(explain anticipated necessary actions, changes required) Criticality Level: HML Where H = 5; M = 3; L = 1

Planning Statement Or Issue, Particularly As Associated With The Service Environment:

Fac = Facility issues; Cost = Cost issues Time = Time issues Pers = Personnel issues

Criticality HML Objectives Prioritized, 5 Being Highest: Fac Cost Time Pers

5.

4.

3.

2.

1.

Problem Background: Resources? (Budget/Other Concerns)?

Task/Deliverable/Objective: Who Will Do? How Measured?

Gantt Chart Showing Time/Task/Deliverable (Goal/Step/Objective) Relationships (Indicate Weeks/Days/Months: X = ) Task/Deliverable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

1. 2. SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








Tool 13 SDA-Glossary Of Terms, Applications (GOTA)


Provide A Definition For Each Term Identified, And Explain How Your Team Will Apply The Concepts And Principles To Your Project: Ongoing Process Control Plan: Corrective Action System: QFD: Pareto Analysis: Statistical Process Control: Variable Measurement, Charting: Attribute Measurement, Charting: Capability: Mean, Range: Gage Repeatability & Reproducibility: Normal Curve: 3 Sigma, 6 Sigma: Assessment For Improvement: Sigma: Kaizen: Data And Documentation: Inferential Statistics: Descriptive Statistics: Dispersion: Variation: Supplier Relationship: Out Of Control: Continuous Process Improvement: World Class: SOP: Cost Analysis: Quality Engineering: Quality management: BEA: Waste Reduction: Defective, Defect: Control Limits: First Piece, Last Piece: Quality Systems: Tolerance: Interpreting Charts: Outliers: Vendor Certification: Pie And Bar Charts: Histograms: Characteristics: Productivity: Failure Mode and Effects Analysis: Understanding Customer: Internal And External Relationships: Change: Methods Analysis: Inspection: Sampling: Value Analysis: ROI: Process Flow Chart: Team: ITTTM Model System Courseware: International Standards Organization: Infrastructure: Culture Of Change: Lean: Matrix: Audit, Assessment:









Tool 14 SDA-P Data Collection System (PDCS)


Operation: Part: Characteristic/Attributes:

Operator: Location:

General Corrective Actions/Other:

# Sample Number (n)

Number Def. (np)

Explanations/Reasons For Rejects:

1 2









SDA-P Data Collection System (PDCS) EXAMPLE

Operation: Example Part: Example Characteristic/Attributes: Shape, Color, Buldge, Rip

Operator: Example Location: Example

Shape

Color

Buldge

Rip

General Corrective Actions/Other:

# Sample Number (n)

Number Def. (np)

Explanations/Reasons For Rejects:

1 60 10 5 1 3 1 2 60 7 4 1 2 3 60 6 2 2 2 4 60 5 3 1 1 5 60 9 5 3 1 6 60 8 2 2 2 2 7 60 8 3 4 1 8 60 11 5 4 2 9 60 12 5 3 3 1 10 60 7 4 3

Tool 14 SDA-General Safety Inspection Checklist /Pareto Chart (GSICPC)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. How To Use: • Assume GSIC is used 2 times per month, generating opportunities for OK/not safe a total of 28 times, annually. • Provide simulated data which demonstrates main safety/maintenance issues, organized in Pareto format, for an annualized basis. • Modify as deemed appropriate to best make the case for team project, and delete these instructions prior to presentation. Compiler (s): Researcher (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Operation: Location: Reason For Inspection: Inspection By: Individuals Interviewed: Reviewed By: Other Pertinent Information: Approval Date:

Checklist Item OK Not Safe

Not App.

Actual Site Explanations/Action/Other

Good Housekeeping/Cleanliness Piling and Storage/Tagging Systems Aisles, Walkways, and Exists Tools And Supplies Ladders And Stairs Machinery And Equipment Floors, Platforms, and Railings Electrical Fixtures/Equipment Dust, Ventilation, and Explosives Overhead Valves, Pipes, Markings Protective Clothing/Equipment Washroom, Lockers, Shower, Deluge Unsafe Practices/Horseplay/SOPs First Aid Facilities Vehicles, Hand and Power Trucks Fire Fighting Equipment Guards And Safety Devices Lighting, Work Tables/Areas General Maintenance Safety Training, Communication Company/OSHA Standards – Comply Cranes, Hoists, Conveyors Scrap And Rubbish Other Items, Circumstances Other Pertinent Information (Attached And Explained):

20 42

18 38

16 34

Freq

uenc

y O

f O

ccur

renc

e

14 30 % O

f Tot

Occ

urre

n General Shape Of Chart Is Constant, But Frequency And % Values Shift To Present Relationships In Facts.

12 26

10 21

8 17

6 13

4 9

2 5

0 1

Pareto Is Often Done Early In Analyses, based On Histograms. It Is Used To Show Areas Needing Attention Versus Those We Can Postpone--A Good Decision Tool.

Shade Columns To Show Differences Among Findings Rank Findings From Highest To Lowest And Left To Right

% Of Occurrences Is For Each Attribute Relative To Total Of All Occurrences. Chart Can Be Expanded To Show Unlimited Numbers Of Attributes









SDA Example--Pareto Charting (PC)

Supplier: Customer: Example, fictional Product or process: Example customer survey inpu

20 42 18 38 16 34

14 30 12

26 10

21 8 17 6 13

4 9

2 5

Freq

uenc

y O

f Occ

urre

nce

0

1

% O

f Tot

al

Occ

urre

nce

General Shape Of Chart Is Constant, But Frequency And % Values Shift To Present Relationships Inherent In Facts Being Shown. Pareto Is Often Done Early In Analyses, Piggy- Backed On Histograms. It Is Used To Show Areas Needing Attention Versus Those We Can Postpone. Thus It Is A Good Decision Tool.

Shade Columns To Show Differences Among Findings Rank Findings From Highest To Lowest And Left To Right

Hig

h R

PM S

quea

l

Noi

se L

evel

Fini

sh

Ble

mis

hes

Too

Hea

vy

Ava

ilabi

lity

% Of Occurrences Is For Each Attribute Relative To Total Of All Occurrences. Chart Can Be Expanded To Show Unlimited Numbers Of Attributes

Tool 14 SDA-General Inspection System (GIS)


Part:

Reviewed By:

Supplier:

Gage/Device:

Operation:

Characteristic:

General Inspection Description:

No. Date Operator Run Quantity

Sample Size

Number Rejected

Number Accepted

Corrective Actions

1

2









Tool 15 SDA-Characteristic Evaluation And Audit System (CEAS)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. Compiler (s): Researcher (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

General Product/Part Description: Inspection Description:

Operation:

Characteristic: Gage/Device: Charts Used:

No. Date/ Operator

Run Size/ Sample

Cp Cpk X-bar R SPC UCL

SPC LCL

R&R%

Corrective Actions/Observations/Other

1 2

What Does SPC Charting, Cp And Cpk Indicate Regarding Potential Changes In Characteristics?

What Does The Most Recent Audit Of Systems Indicate Regarding Characteristics Changes?

What Engineering/Design Changes Are Being Considered And What Will Be The Potential Impacts On Characteristics?

What Relationships And Implications Can Be Noted based On Operator, Date, Size Of Run, And other Issues Such As Maintenance:

What Relationships And Implications Can Be Noted based On USL and LSL, Tolerancing, and Gage R & R %:

Identify And Attach Other Pertinent Inspection Information, Or Related Data:









Tool 15 SDA-General Inspection System (GIS)


Part:

Reviewed By:

Supplier:

Gage/Device:

Operation:

Characteristic:

General Inspection Description:

No. Date Operator Run Quantity

Sample Size

Number Rejected

Number Accepted

Corrective Actions

1

2









Tool 15 SDA-Variable Data Short Run Pre Control (VDSRPC)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. Researcher (s): Compiler (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Part: Operator: Characteristic: Operation:

Inspection Description:

Run 1; Date: Run 2; Date: Run 3; Date: Subgroup Date/time 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5

1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2

Sample Measures

1 1 2 2 2 Sums 7 9 6 8 7

Averages 1.4 1.8 1.2 1.6 1.4 Ranges 1 1 1 1 1

All Averages Summed = 7.4 All Averages Summed = All Averages Summed = Total Average/5 = Mean = 7.4/5 = 1.48

Total Average/5 =

Total Average/5 =

UCL = 2.00 Range = 1.00 LCL = 0.00






Collect From All,

UCL =1 75

2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2

LCL =1 25

Mean =1 48

Compile Compiler Portfolio Reflections, Summary Of Technical Work, Assessment, Based On Individual Researcher Inputs:


Tool 16 SDA-Capability Calculation (CC)


General Problem Or Capability Issue Requiring Improvement (Supply This Information based On Your Project—Each Researcher Must Provide Original Different But Related Data And Information): Operation: Characteristic: USL: X-bar: Part: LSL: R: Gage: Tolerance: History And Background Of Capability On This Characteristic:

Subgroup 2 3 4 5 Calculate standard deviation (estimated), or sigma, σ, where:

σ = R/d2, and σ =________/________, and σ = d2 1.128 1.693 2.059 2.326

Calculate 6σ, where:

6σ = 6 ( σ ), and 6σ = 6 (________), and 6σ =

Calculate Cp where: Cp = USL-LSL/6σ (USL) – (LSL) ( ) – ( )

Cp = (6σ) and Cp = ( ) and Cp =

Calculate Cpk as CPU: (USL) – (X bar) ( ) – ( )

where CPU = USL-Xbar/3σ and CPU = (3σ) and CPU = ( ) and CPU =

Calculate Cpk as CPL: (X bar) – (LSL) ( ) – ( )

where CPU = USL-Xbar/3σ and CPL = (3σ) and CPL = ( ) and CPL = Capability Interpretation And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements (2002 Preferred, Being Specific Regarding Which Element Referred To): Opportunities For Improvement And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements (2002 Preferred, Being Specific Regarding Which Element Referred To): Who Will Pursue Tolerance Changes: How Will Changes Be Pursued: Customer, Quality Relationships:

1. 1. 1.









Tool 16 SDA-Capability Calculation (CC) EXAMPLE General Problem Or Capability Issue Requiring Improvement: Not necessarily ever under control, requires further investigation.

Operation: Data example Characteristic: USL: .505 X-bar: .501 Part: LSL: .495 R: .006 Gage: Tolerance: .010 History And Background Of Capability On This Characteristic: This value, as presented, is based on information provided as examples throughout the data tools portion of the toolkit. The scenario is to change tolerance and see impact on Cp and Cpk.

Subgroup 2 3 4 5 Calculate standard deviation (estimated), or sigma, σ, where:

σ = R/d2, and σ = .006/2.326, and σ = .0025 d2 1.128 1.693 2.059 2.326

Calculate 6σ, where:

6σ = 6 ( σ ), and 6σ = 6 ( .0025 ), and 6σ = .015

Calculate Cp where: Cp = USL-LSL/6σ (USL) – (LSL) ( .505 ) – ( .495 )

Cp = (6σ) and Cp = ( .015 ) and Cp = .67

Calculate Cpk as CPU: (USL) – (X bar) ( .505 ) – ( .501 )

where CPU = USL-Xbar/3σ and CPU = (3σ) and CPU = ( .0075 ) and CPU = .53

Calculate Cpk as CPL: (X bar) – (LSL) ( .501 ) – ( .495 )

where CPU = USL-Xbar/3σ and CPL = (3σ) and CPL = ( .0075 ) and CPL = .80 Capability Interpretation: Most companies require a minimum 1.30 value for Cp and Cpk. None of the values provided (as shown) are sufficient, indicating further improvement is required. It would also be concluded that the operation or process being studied is not under control in its basic form. Discuss changes in tolerance, and its impact here. Opportunities For Improvement: Given the values provided from production (mean and range), held constant, change the tolerance from .010 to .020, based on .510 and .490 as the USL and LSL. Run the Cp and Cpk values for the changed tolerance and interpret the findings.

Tool 16 SDA-Measurement Systems Analysis, Evaluation (MSAE)


General Background Information On Issue Or Measurement System Requiring Improvement And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: Identified Measurement Application, Production Process, Description And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements:

As Part Of The Broader Inspection Process Develop/Attach GIS For Systematically Performing Measurement And Data Gathering And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: Explain How The Measurement System Relates To/Functions With Each Of The Following Measurement Features:

Feature Describe How The System Functions In This Feature: Perpendicularity

Concentricity Straightness Roundness

Flatness Cylindricity Parralelism Angularity

Runout Explain How The Measurement System Relates To/Functions With Each Of The Following Indicators And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements Within Your Project Context:

Number No. Date Operator Run Quantity

Sample Size Rej Acc

Tolerance Cpk R&R% Time Req.

Digital Hookup

Metric Issues

1

Explain How The Measurement System Relates To/Functions With Each Of The Following Indicators And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements Within Your Project Context:

No

Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing

Calibration

Form

Fit

Function

Finish

Inspector Vs Operator?

1









Tool 17 SDA-Gage Reproducibility And Repeatability System (GRARS) General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. Compiler (s): Researchers (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Part Description: Operation:


Based On The Example Completed Nearby Supply Data Representative Of Your Project And Demonstrate How To Perform/Calculate A Gauge R & R (Each Researcher Should Supply Original And Different Data): Tolerance: Characteristic: Gage/Device: Charts Used:

Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Operator A: B: C: Sample Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Avg A

RA

Avg B

RB

Avg C

RC

RA Trials D4 K1 Operator

s K2 Max Avg A, B, C

2 3.65 RB 2 3.27 4.56

Min Avg A, B, C

RC 3 2.58 3.05 3 2.70 Diff, Max-Min

R Avg Note: Trials = operator iterations

Calculate UCL R Where: (R Avg) (D4) = UCL R (_______) (______) = UCL R UCL R = Note: n = # parts; r = operators

Calculate Equipment Variation (EV) Where:

EV = ( R Avg) (K1)

EV = (_________) (_________)

EV =

Calculate % EV Where:

% EV = 100[ (EV) / (Tolerance) ]

% EV = 100[ (_________) / (_________) ]

% EV = Calculate Appraiser Variation (AV) Where:

AV = √ [ (Diff Max-Min)(K2)]² - [(EV)² / (n x r)]

AV = √ [ (________)(_______)]² - [(_______)²/ (______ x ______)]

AV =

Calculate % AV Where:

% AV = 100 √ [ (AV) / (Tolerance)]

% AV = 100 √ [ (_________) / (_________)]

% AV = Calculate R & R Where:

R&R = √ (EV) ²+ (AV) ²

R&R = √ (_________) ²+ (_________) ²

R&R =

Calculate % R & R Where:

% R&R = √ ( % EV) ²+ (% AV) ²

% R&R = √ (_________) ²+ (_________) ²

% R&R = Identify And Attach Other Pertinent Gage R & R Information And Explain How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: What Does SPC Charting, Characteristics, Tolerance Cp And Cpk Indicate Regarding Gage R & R Interpretation, And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: What Does The Gage R & R Interpretation And Analysis Indicate Regarding Inspection, Measurement And Calibration Systems And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: What Engineering/Design Changes Are Being Considered And What Will Be The Potential Impacts On Characteristics And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: What Relationships And Implications Can Be Noted based On Operator, Date, Sampling, And other Issues Such As Maintenance And How This Relates To One Or More Main ISO 9000 Standard Elements: SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








SDA-Gage Reproducibility And Repeatability System (GRARS) EXAMPLE Part Description: Example Operation: Example


Tolerance: .032 Characteristic: Example Gage/Device: Charts Used:

Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Operator A: B: C: Sample Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Range

1 1.300 1.301 1.300 .001 1.300 1.302 1.301 .002 2 1.303 1.303 1.302 .001 1.300 1.300 1.300 3 1.306 1.305 1.306 .001 1.305 1.307 1.306 .002

4 1.305 1.305 1.305 1.304 1.303 1.304 .001 5 1.300 1.300 1.301 .001 1.298 1.299 1.299 .001 6 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.300 1.301 1.300 .001 7 1.297 1.300 1.300 .003 1.300 1.301 1.300 .001 8 1.300 1.300 1.299 .001 1.300 1.300 1.300 9 1.306 1.306 1.306 1.305 1.306 1.305 .001 10 1.305 1.306 1.306 .001 1.305 1.305 1.306 .001

13.026 .0009 13.024 .001 13.022 13.017 13.025 13.021 1.3042 1.3021

Avg A

RA

Avg B

RB

Avg C

RC

RA .0009 Trials D4 K1 Operator

s K2 Max Avg A, B, C 1.3042

RB .001 2 3.27 4.56 2 3.65 Min Avg A, B, C 1.3021

RC 3 2.58 3.05 3 2.70 Diff, Max-Min .0021

R Avg .00095 Note: Trials = operator iterations

Calculate UCL R Where: (R Avg) (D4) = UCL R (.00095) (2.58) = UCL R UCL R = .0002

Note: n = # parts; r = operators Calculate Equipment Variation (EV) Where:

EV = ( R Avg) (K1)

EV = (.00095) (3.05)

EV = .0029

Calculate % EV Where:

% EV = 100[ (EV) / (Tolerance) ]

% EV = 100[ (.0029) / (.032) ]

% EV = 9.05 % Calculate Appraiser Variation (AV) Where:

AV = √ [ (Diff Max-Min)(K2)]² - [(EV)² / (n x r)]

AV = √ [ (.0021)(3.65)]² - [(.0029)²/ (10 x 2)]

AV = .087

Calculate % AV Where:

% AV = 100 √ [ (AV) / (Tolerance)]

% AV = 100 √ [ (.087) / (.032)]

% AV = 2.70 % Calculate R & R Where:

R&R = √ (EV) ²+ (AV) ²

R&R = √ (.0029) ²+ (.087) ²

R&R = .087

Calculate % R & R Where:

% R&R = √ ( % EV) ²+ (% AV) ²

% R&R = √ (9.05) ²+ (2.70) ²

% R&R = 10 %

Tool 17 SDA-Gage R & R, Training, Tradition, Infrastructural Change (GRRTTIC)


Infrastructure Issue,

Weakness R & R,

Recommendation Tradition, Cause Change Plan, Knowledge,

Relationships Alternatives, Effect,

Impacts 1.

1. 1. 1. 1.

Training Opportunities: 1.

Training Methods: 1.

Measureables: 1.

Using Gage R & R Forms Provided, List A Detailed Standard Procedure (SOP) For Training To Do R & R, Particularly For Operators:

Address What Other Related Training, And Other SOP’s Will Be Needed To Address Effective Change And Improvement Related To Gage R & R: Explain How To Organize, Manage And Conduct Training Related To Gage R & R Issues Above:

Explain Team And Training Relationships For Performing Training About Gage R & R Studies—What Are The Opportunities And Challenges: Explain Toolkit And E-project Relationships For Training And Performing Gage Studies—What Are The Opportunities And Challenges:









Tool 17 SDA-Open Agenda Tracking, Corrective Action Form (OATCAF)


General Problem Requiring Improvement, Detailed Description:

Operation: Location:

Open Agenda Topic/Issue/Activity When Started/Done? Follow Up Details/Actions?

1. 1. 1.

Concern/Complaint/Problem Title:

General Background Information On Issue Or Problem Requiring Improvement:

Identified Defect Or Problem Requiring Improvement, Detailed Description:

Root Causes/Definition (Attach A Cause And Effect Diagram):

Immediate Interim Action/Effective Date, Containment:

Permanent Action, Effective Date And Verification (describe improvements made in components, assemblies, SOP’s, processes and locations, inspection procedures, or other permanent changes: Control For Prevention:

Other pertinent information/source and general description of concern. Attach or refer to appropriate information, and explain how to access: SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








Tool 18 SDA-Supplier Audit General Evaluation (SAGE)


General Background Information On Issue Or Problem Requiring Improvement:

Identified Supplier, Detailed Description:

Explain Desirable Characteristics Possessed By Supplier:

Complete A Cause And Effect Diagram Indicating Issues And Opportunities For Supplier/Customer Relationship Improvements:

Explain Potential Opportunities For improvement In Supplier:

Identify And Develop A Step By Step Standard procedure For Systematically Addressing Supplier/Customer Relationships:

Identify And Develop Specific Questions To Be Used To Target The Survey System In Your Project:

Explain How This Audit Can Be Improved:

Explain How This Audit Can Assist In Improving The Broader System And Infrastructure For Your Team Project:









Tool 18 SDA-Preliminary Systematic Design Of Experiments (PSDOE)

General Use/Application: SDA focuses technical content and deliverables on project objectives, all associated with technological assessment for improvement. All researchers on team complete the information below and submit to the compiler for finalizing in portfolio. When completed, all researchers should be listed as contributing, detailing technical assessment issues, as reflections by all related to the SDA. Compilers also develop reflections synthesized over time, based on inputs contributed by each, and their own review and reflections of the team’s work. This also involves use of SDA-FACR (below) to determine findings, analysis, conclusions and recommendations (FACR) ultimately merged into grand form format by compilers for inclusion in the final portfolio when compiled by team leadership. Persons not contributing substantially at SDA’s, and FACR responses should have lower scores shown in PPMTA at final grand portfolio. Researcher (s): Compiler (s): Team: Phase: Tool: Date:

Part:

Operator:

Characteristic: Operation:


Run 1; Date: Run 2; Date: Run 3; Date: Subgroup Date/time 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5

1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2

Sample Measures

1 1 2 2 2 Sums 7 9 6 8 7

Averages 1.4 1.8 1.2 1.6 1.4 All Averages Summed = 7.4 All Averages Summed = All Averages Summed = Total Average/5 = Mean = 7.4/5 = 1.48 Total Average/5 = Total Average/5 = Mean = 1.48

Trial: Notes: Trial: Notes: Trial: Notes: Conditions: Conditions: Conditions: Factor: Factor: Factor: Factor: Factor: Factor: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: Level: SDA-FACR General Use/Application: o Identify the project objective being addressed (usually at least one or two would be anticipated from PPARMP). o Explain findings, analyses observed as various data and documentation in SDA (ex: how form/work relates to ISO 9000?). o Explain conclusions, recommendations based on findings, analyses in data, documentation (ex: improvements to form, other tools to try). o Address relationships in other forms, particularly PPARMP to provide direction in methodology for project. o SDA compilers use SDA FACR’s posted at discussion boards compiled as grand forms for portfolio presentation with all SDA’s. o Team leadership summarizes SDA FACR inputs to show what was learned, objective accomplishment, course outcome progress. Researcher 1. Project objective








1 4

1 6

1 8

2 0

1 2

1 0

Major Effect, Symptom

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects


Problem, Cause,

Major Issue

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects


Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects


Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects

Sub-issues, Effects

General Cause And Effect Analysis Diagram

Documents

Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical …Industrial Technologists’ Toolkit For Technical Management (ITTTM) Courseware Applications, Project Portfolio Template Data Tools