Parivartan - ASQ...PARIVARTAN First Time Right, Long Time Right 2 a global business group with...

1

PARIVARTANFirst Time Right, Long Time Right

2

a global business group

with products and services in over 150 countries

over 660,800 employees and operations

in over 100 countries

group revenue of $103.51 bn

with 67.3% generated in geographies other than India

global leader in several sectors

2

Vision of Excellence

One must forever strive for excellence,

or even perfection, in any task, however

small and never be satisfied with second

best.

“

“

TBEM

To Run The Business

“Excellently”

Business Ethics

To Run The Business

“Ethically”

JRD Tata, Former Chairman Of Tata Sons

3

Our Presence

CHANDIGARH

Kansal

Myst (Kasauli)NEW DELHI

Hailey RoadAHMEDABAD

New Haven

MUMBAI

Prive (Lonavala)

Amantra (Kalyan)

Aveza (Mulund)

RPG (Thane)

NH/SG (Boisar)

SG/NH (Vasind)

Boisar 2

Amantra phase-2

New Haven

PUNE

Inora Park (Undri)

La Montana (Talegaon)

La Montana Phase-2

(Talegaon)

BHUBANESHWAR

Ariana

NCR

Raisina (Gurgaon)

Primanti (Sec 72-Gurgaon)

Gurgaon Gateway(Sec 113)

Arebella (Sohna Gurgaon)

Bahadurgarh (Haryana)

Primanti-Phase-2 (Gurgaon)

KOLKATA

Eden Court (Rajarhat)

Avenida (Rajarhat 2)

Kona

Alipore

BENGALURU

Promont (Bhanshankari)

Alstom

Kartk PPP (Baglur)

NH (Peenya)

Peenya Phase-2

CHENNAI

Santorini (Sriperumbudur)

NH RibbonWalk(Mambkkm)

Crescent Lake Homes

36 Projects

In 3 Countries

Sri Lanka

One Colombo

Maldives

Apex Realty

4

3

Tata HousingLuxury 200 Lakhs

Lavishness ,Pampering,

Exclusivity, ExperiencePremium 75 – 200 lakhs

Prestige, Lifestyle,

Achievement,

Number of Amenities Affordable 20-65 lakhs

Pride of Ownership, Moving

Up in Life

Self Identity, Upgrade

Value 12-18lakhs

Utility and practicality

emphasized

Community Life A Better

Future for Children

Security

Tata Housing

(Raising the bar) Living

perfected

Tata Value Homes

(The enabler) Enriching

Life

5

Project and Team Selection

SECTION #1

4

Understanding the Context for Project Selection1.1.0

1.1.1 (CQ 1): Who was responsible for selecting the project?

7

Technical Review Committee

Management Review Committee

Strategy & Business Excellence Group

MD & CEO, CFO, Head Engineering, HODs

MD & CEO, CFO, Head Engineering, CHPs, RHEs, PHs, HODs

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION GROUP

Project TeamRespective SPOC

Brotin BanerjeeMD & CEO

Vivek GoyalCFO

Sachin GargHead – Strategy, Business

Excellence & Technical Training

Kangkan ChakrabortyHead Engineering

Ashoka MohantyHead – HR, CRM &

Estate

Alcide CoelhoHead – QA&QC

Internal MetricsTata Housing Quality Hallmark Score 8.50 >=8.75Third Party Quality Audit Score 8.34 >=8.75

External MetricsCustomer Satisfaction score (CSAT) 62% >=75%

Snag free handover – First Time Right 80% >=90%

Pan-India survey by Track2Realty, reveals that Indian home buyers aredissatisfied with their home project quality. It finds that as many as 84% homebuyers are sulking and have serious issues with their developers, for there iswide gap in quality.

Understanding the Context for Project Selection1.1.0

1.1.1 (CQ 2): What background information of the company or those who selected the project is needed to better understand the context of the project?

PROJECT BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Tata Housing is part of Tata Group one of the Fortune 100 companies. Tata group touches 25% of worlds population through its different products & services.

Tata Housing having 36 projects spread across 03 countries involves more than 15000 workmen and serves more than 10000 customers.

Unable to achieve the set target of YoY CSAT score on product quality.

Average Customer Snags per unit has broad gap.

Ro

le

Tod

ays Ch

allenges

8

Market Report

CURRENT SCORE

TARGETS

Company background

5

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION GROUP

Project Selection Process1.2.0

1.2.1 (CQ 1): How was the gap or opportunity brought to the attention of the project identification group?

HOW WAS GAP BROUGHT TO ATTENTION

9

Technical Review Committee

Management Review Committee

Strategy & Business Excellence Group

Project Review Meeting

Customer Satisfaction

Deviations noted

Project assigned

Monthly Project Review by PRM observes downwards trend in CSAT. YoY Report reflects the gap is widening and needs attention

FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17

Target 75 75 85 85

Actual Score 62 66 75 62

75 75

85 85

62

66

75

62

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

Rat

ing

in P

erce

nta

ge

FUNCTION/AREA GAP IDENTIFIED

EngineeringPoor Product

Quality

Estate

Management

High Customer

Complains

Customer

Relationship

Management

High Customer

Complains

PlanningRework leading to

delays


1.2.1 (CQ 2): What was the gap (problem solving)? 1.2.1 (CQ 3): What area of the organization had the gap or the opportunity?

10

GAP

STRATEGY MAP

GAP AREA

6

1.2.2 : What data was generated to help select the project ? 1.2.2 : What methods and/or tools were used to assess/prioritize the need for the Project ?


1.2.2 (CQ 1): What data was generated to help select the project?

11

Multiple

Data

Quality Audit NC Report

Customer Snag Report

Complaint Log

CSAT

Customer Satisfaction Survey Parameters

1.2.2 : What data was generated to help select the project ? 1.2.2 : What methods and/or tools were used to assess/prioritize the need for the Project ?


1.2.2 (CQ 2): What methods and/or tools were used to assess/prioritize the need for the Project?1.2.2 (CQ 3): Why were these methods and/or tools used to select the project?

12

TOOLS USED

Assessing various customer needs and prioritize the product quality project

KANO MODEL

To drill-down from the broad goals and identify specific, measurable targets that can be used to

improve product quality.

CTQ TREE

WHY WERE THESE TOOLS USED

7

GOAL PERFORMANCE MEASURE


1.2.3 (CQ 1): What goals (organizational and/or local), performance measures, and/or strategies is the project expected to impact? 1.2.3 (CQ 2): What was the relationship between the stated measures and perceived gap in 1.2.1?

13

First Time Right

Handing over snag free

apartments

Long Time Right

High customer

satisfaction

Percentage of apartments handed over without snags

Living in Customer Satisfaction with Product Quality


1.2.3 (CQ 3): What is the problem statement that expresses where the organization wants to be at the end of the project?

14

B U S I N E S S C A S E

Tata Housing is on a mission to delight their customers by providing qualitylife spaces through continuous improvement. This will help them becomemost preferred brand and industry leader fulfilling Tata Group’s vision andmission. With its initial success in handing over apartments, the companyneeds to ensure snag free apartments and product quality customersatisfaction scores living in.

P R O B L E M S T A T E M E N T

The average snag free apartment rate at the time of handover is 80% andproduct quality customer satisfaction scores are 62% living in. This needsto be improved to achieve an industry leadership position for Tata Housing.

8

Team Selection And Preparation1.3.0

1.3.1 (CQ 1): How were the stakeholders groups identified? 1.3.1 (CQ 2): What or who are stakeholder groups?

CRM

Interested Party

Project Team

Executer

Engineering

Executer

Design

Influencer

Finance

Interested Party

Marketing & Sales

Interested Party

Customer

Buyers

15

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS

STAKEHOLDER IDENTIFICATION TOOLS

01 02 03 04

SIPOC ARMI

Process mapping Impact Analysis


1.3.2 (CQ 1): What knowledge or skill sets were determined to be necessary for successful completion of the project? 1.3.2 (CQ 2): To what extent did the existing stakeholder groups have the required knowledge or skills?

16

WHAT EXTENT OF REQUIRED SKILL STAKEHOLDER GROUPS HAD?

SKILL SETS

STAKEHOLDER GROUP

1. Management Committee

2. Project Team 3. Engineering 4. Design5. Marketing &

Sales6. CRM 7. Finance 8. Customer

Beginner BeginnerIntermediate Beginner Beginner Beginner Beginner Beginner

▪ Project Management

▪ Problem Solving Metholdogy

▪ Benchmarking▪ Inspection skills

▪ FMEA & Seven QC Tools

▪ Benchmarking▪ Project

Methodology & Scope

▪ Construction Practices & Workflow

▪ Project Methodology & Scope

▪ Quality Improvement Methodology

▪ Seven QC Tools

▪ Uniqueness of THDC Product Quality

9


1.3.2 (CQ 3): What additional knowledge and skills were brought in to make the project successful?

17

01. Technical Skills

▪ Basics of Construction/Finishing / Inspection▪ Reskilling for key functions like waterproofing, etc.

02. Project Management Skills

▪ DMAIC methodology

▪ Building a Business Case & Project Charter

▪ Project Scope & Awareness Training

▪ Seven QC tools

▪ Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQ’s)

▪ Process Mapping, SIPOC, Swim Lane, Cause Effect

▪ General Concepts & Goals of Hypothesis Testing

03. Leadership Skills

▪ Innovative thinking▪ Change Management▪ Team building

▪ Collaboration


Training conducted from Front Line till the Senior Management Level

1.3.3 (CQ 1): Before the project started, what specific training was done?

18

500 team members trained on Improving Inspection skills

Project Management Professional Training

TRADE Practitioner Program for Benchmarking Training with 81 members

32 members trained on ASQ ITEA Criteria and Problem Solving (Six Sigma GB)

10


Identification of Key Measures

• High impact defects defined

Project Charter with Timeline

• Timelines with milestones defined for each stakeholder

Escalation Matrix

• Process defined for faster & easier Issue & Conflict resolution

Risk & Mitigation Matrix

• Process defined for resolution & minimization of Risk if any

Project Kick-Off Meeting

• Project launched with all primary and critical stakeholders

STAKEHOLDERS COLLABORATE TOGETHER TO DEFINE AND FORMULATE PROJECT GUIDELINES

1.3.3 (CQ 2): Before the project started, what was done to prepare the team to work together as a team?

19

ARMI LegendA : Approver or Key decision maker

R : Resource with expertise and skills

M : Member with defined roles and responsibilities

I : Interested party to be kept informed

KEY STAKEHOLDERS DEFINE MEASURE ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL

1. Management Committee A - - A -

2. Project Team M M M M M

3. Engineering R R - R M

4. Design - - R R M

5. CRM R R I I I

6. Marketing & Sales I I I I I

7. Finance - I I I M

8. Customer - - - - I


1.3.4 (CQ 1): What roles and expectations were determined ahead of the project? 1.3.4 (CQ 3): Before the project started, what team routines, including communication were established?

STAKEHOLDER ANALYIS (ARMI TOOL)

ROUTINE COMMUNICATION PLAN

MESSAGE AUDIENCE MEDIA WHO WHOM WHEN

Project Progress MRC Meetings Project Champion MRC members Monthly

Toll Gate Reviews Project Team & Project

Mentor

Email / Meetings Project Leader Team members As per defined Tollgate

Group Activities Project Team Email / Meetings Project Leader Team members Need basis

Project plan update Project Sponsor &

Mentor

Email / Meetings Project Leader Team members Bi Weekly

Project Deliverables/To

Do Activities

MRC Meetings Project Leader MRC members Quarterly

Stakeholder routines and communication

20

11


1.3.4 (CQ 2): What deadlines and deliverables did the team have to consider ahead of actually starting the project?

Goal Statement Project Scope

Metric Current

level

Goal /

Target

Target

date Existing

Projects

In Scope

Process Post Shell & core

stage starting from

Plastering till Unit Handover

to Estate.

Out of Scope

Monetization, Excavation to

completion of shell & core

(Up to Block work)

First Time Right - Percentage ofapartments handed overwithout snags

80 % 90% July’17

Long Time Right - Living inCustomer Satisfaction withProduct Quality

62 % 75%July’17

Project Plan Project Team

Start Date End Date

Sponsor: Brotin Banerjee(MD & CEO)

Member:Amogh Bhave(Engineering)

Define 16-Jun-16 30-June-16

Champion:Alcide Coelho(Head QA&QC)

Member:Mahendra Pawar(Design)

Measure 01-July-16 30-July16

Mentor:Sachin Garg(Head SBE)

Member:Sagar Patil(Contracts)

Analyze 01- Aug-16 30- Nov-16

Project Leader:Sameer Jorwekar(Quality Assurance)

Improve 01- Dec-16 31-Mar-17

Control 01-Apr-17 31-July-17

21

Deadlines Enterprise Project Management System

Current Situation and Root Cause/Improvement Opportunity Analysis

SECTION #2

12

Key Measures Expected of the Project2.1.0

2.1.1 (CQ 1): What specific goals and/or measures was the team trying to achieve with the project? 2.1.1 (CQ 2): What additional potential benefits, other than the specific goals and/or measures, was the project expected to impact?

GOALS AND BENEFITS

23

Product Quality C-SAT score From 62% to 75%Ensure Long Time Right Post Handover

Snag free units handed over => 90% Ensure First Time Right during Handover

Increase in Customer Referrals

2

1 Primary Goal

Primary Goal

Additional Benefits

T1 Past Performance

T2 Internal Strategy

T3 Internal Benchmark

T4 External Benchmark

T5 Regulatory requirements

Corporate Balance Card Matrix

2.2.1 (CQ 1): What methods and/or tools were used to identify possible root causes/improvement opportunities?

Possible Root Causes/Improvement Opportunities2.2.0

Cause Effect Matrix

SIPOC

Swim Lane Flowchart Process Analysis

24

13


2.2.1 (CQ 2): Why were these methods/tools selected? 2.2.1 (CQ 3): How was the team prepared to use these methods and/or tools?

TOOLS

Ishikawa SIPOCSwim Lane

Flowchart

Process

Analysis

WHY WAS THE TOOL USED

To ideate on possible causes and derive relationship between the potential factors causing an overall effect

To understand the overall process in terms of supplier, processes and output

To diagram the detailed business processes along with key players; in this multiple functional project

To understand the overall process and convey how changes will take place through a series of stages

TEAM PREPARED

Six Sigma Skills training was conducted to train the team & stakeholders on the quality Tools and its efficient usage

25


2.2.2 (CQ 1): What data was generated and how was the data analysed to identify the possible root cause/improvement opportunities? 2.2.2 (CQ 2): What were the possible root cause/improvement opportunities?

26

POSSIBLE ROOT CAUSE

Failure Modes51

Cause & Effect 42

Segmentation8

Improper Laying of Tiles Improper grouting/ Joint filling in platform

Chipped & crack Tiles Platform facia patty fixing issues

Grouting of Tiles not properly done

Paint finish not uniform

Flooring material issue –Shade variation

Cracks on paint surface

Material protection not followed

Paint stains on other material

Material quality not as per customer expectations

Loose patches on paint surface

Door shutter Paint / Polish finish not uniform

Water Leakage through CP & Sanitary fittings

Alignment of door frame or shutter

Improper installation of CP & Sanitary fittings

Cracked or Damaged door frame / shutters

Kitchen sink rusted

Door Fittings Material issue Incomplete & improper work

Crack observed on Platform top

Improper water pressure

DATA GENERATEDCustomer Complaint Log

Pareto chart

22

14

Final Root Cause(s)/Improvement Opportunity(ies)2.3.0

2.3.1 (CQ 1): What methods and/or tools were used to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)? 2.3.1 (CQ 2): Why were these methods and/or tools selected? 2.3.1 (CQ 3): How was the team prepared to use these methods and/or tools?

WHY WASTHE TOOL USED

HOW WAS THE TEAM PREPARED

Pareto Analysis of Internal & External Snags

To understanding key internal & external snags

2 Days Refresher Training on Quality tools to teammembers

Baseline Sigma Calculation To obtain baseline DPMO & sigma level

Six Sigma Green Belt Workshop

VOC Analysis To study in depth customer pain areas & identify action plan

Knowledge Sharing workshops among key players

Root Cause Analysis To zero down on actual root cause of the key issues as identified from pareto & VOC analysis

Yellow Belt Training for key members

TOOLS USED

27

Cause Effect Analysis

SIPOC

Swim Lane Flowchart

Process Analysis


2.3.2 (CQ 1): What data was generated and how was the data analysed in order to identify the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

28

Failure Modes51

Segmentation08

37

22 2215

8 5 4 3 231%

50%69% 81% 88% 92% 96% 98% 100%

0%20%40%60%80%100%120%

0

10

20

30

40

La Montanna - Customer Snags Pareto Analysis - Period Oct'15 - Oct'16

Potential Failure Mode & Effects Analysis

Process Steps

or Product

Functions

Potential

Failure

Mode

Severit

y (1-10)

Potential

Cause(s) of

Failure

Occurrenc

e (1-10)

Detection

(1-10)

Recommended

Action

Surface

Preparation8

Non Compliance to

MS & checklist2 2 Internal audits

Breakage of

WP8

Incorrect material

specs/ Material not

suitable for location

5 3

Revise specs &

standarization of

material as per

location

Corner Not

treated8 Poor Workmanhsip 6 5

1.Training to workers

2. Internal auditsLeakage

Physical

supervision240

Physical

supervision

Material

approval at site120 Dec'2016

ofResponsibility: Project Team Page:

16.08.2017

FMEA Team: Mahendra, Amogh, Sameer, Sagar (Revised) 18.08.17

Process/Product: Product Quality FMEA Date: (original)

Potential

Effects

of

Failure

Current

Controls

Risk Priority

Number (RPN)

Prepared By: Sameer Jorwekar

Process

Responsibility

and Target

Completion Date

Action

Taken

32 Nov'2016

Dec'2016

Leakage

Leakage

Surface Preparation

for Wet area Water

proofing

Actions

Customer Complaint Log

Pareto Chart Affinity Diagram

FMEA

15


2.3.2 (CQ 2): What are specific examples of data analysis that led to the final root cause?

Pareto Analysis of Internal Snags

Pareto Analysis of Customer Snags

External Survey – Analysis of VOC

Sigma Level Calculation

Process Analysis

29


2.3.2 (CQ 3): What was (were) the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies)?

S. No. Identified X’s Status

X1 Shade variation in flooring

X2 Door hardware & functionality issue

X3 Cracks on kitchen platform

X4 Sorting of tiles

X5 Grouting of tiles

X6 Cracked & chipped tiles

X7 Surface undulations on flooring

X8 Use of roto printed tiles

X9 Misalignment of frame & shutter

X10 Damaged door shutter & paint/polish issue

X11 Avoid use of spacers completely

FIN

AL

RO

OT

CA

USE

S

S. No. Identified X’s Status

X12 Incomplete & improper work

X13 Cracks/stains on surface & finish not uniform

X14 Fixing of doors after finishing

X15 Seepage through CP & sanitary fittings

X16 Improper water pressure in plumbing systems

X17 Oxidization of kitchen sink

X18 Selection of granite by standard checklist

X19 Use of factory finished doors

X20 Re-design of MEP system

X21 Periodic maintenance of door hardware

X22 Door hardware & functionality issue

30

14

LEGEND: Shortlisted Dropped

16


Shade variation in Flooring

Door Hardware

Grouting of Tiles not done properlySurface undulation & crack and Chipped tiles

Cracks & damages in frame & shutterDoor Shutter paint/ Polish finish not uniform

Incomplete & improper work

Cracks and stains on paint surface

Seepage through CP & Sanitary fittings

Improper Water pressure in plumbing systems

Cracks on kitchen platform

Paint finish not uniform

Improper material protection

2.3.3 (CQ 1): How was (were) the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies) validated?2.3.3 (CQ 2): What evidence showed that the final root cause(s)/improvement opportunity(ies) were validated prior to solution development?

31

Validated Root Causes13

• The identified root causes were discussed & validated by Internal Stakeholders

Internal approval

• Mock ups were performed of possible RC to confirm correctness & actual results

Mock Up

• Feedback was taken from Internal & external customers on Mock ups

Customer Validation

• Identified sources validated and approved during Internal & TPQA audit

Audit confirmation

Final Root Cause Validation Process

FINAL CAUSES14Mockup Apartments

Changes Reason for change

1. Change in the project scope Projects where final solutions can be deployed identified and incorporated in the scope

2. Introduction of Quarterly C-SAT Survey process To know the current baseline for the C-SAT and measure improvement regularly

3. Reduction in dissatisfaction score measure was removed Eliminating the duplicate goal

4. Percentage of snag free units handed over introduced instead of average number of snags per unit

Ensuring First Time Right

5. Introduction of new team members in project team In order to replace the team members who left the organization & also to extent the reach of the project deployment, new team members were introduced

CHANGES IN PROJECT SCOPE

Project Management Update2.4.0

2.4.1 (CQ 1): How was the correctness of the initial project scope, deliverables, and timings confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

32

17


2.4.1 (CQ 2): How were the stakeholders involved and/or communicated with during the root cause/improvement opportunity phase of the project?

Stakeholder Group Roles How were stakeholders involved


MD, Head EngineeringCFO, Head of Depts.

Approving Authority

2. Project Team Estate, QA&QC, SBE

Resource Allocation Compiled information with focus on objectives Clear road block for the project team

3. EngineeringProject Head, Regional Head, CHP, RHE

Contributed ideas for new development Review the project Brainstorming for the potential root causes Provider of internal data

4. Design Head - Design Contributed ideas for new development Review the project

5. Marketing & Sales

Head – M&S

Voice of customers Validation of customer pain areas Provider of customer data

6. CRM Head - Customer Care

Contributed ideas for new development Review the project Brainstorming for the potential root causes Provider of internal data

7. Finance Head - Finance Approve & allocate additional budget

8. Customer Customers Validation (Mockup apartments)

33

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT

Stakeholders Communicated Through

EPM Tool

Group Discussion

Emails

STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATION


2.4.1 (CQ 3): What stakeholder resistance was identified and /or addressed in this phase of the project?

34

Stakeholder Group Identified Resistance Impact Addressed / Action Taken


No Resistance NA

2. Project Team No Resistance NA

3. Engineering

To attend defects/reworks Quality of workmanship Inflexibility to change due to nature of

industry & job that has not been customer centric in past

High

Engineer to certify and release after 100% check of all parameters using automated tool

Quality to certify & release after 100% checks of all parameters

Customer Centricity Training program Senior Mgt participated in EM town hall Goal Sheet were changed to include living in

experience score

4. Design Changing low light design at additional

costHigh

Group discussion and shared customer complaints to build consensus to change design

5. Marketing & Sales No Resistance NA

6. CRM No Resistance NA

7. Finance Additional Budget Medium Budget approved for critical items

8. Customer Additional Maintenance cost Low Impact on cost of additional services

communicated to customers

18


2.4.1 (CQ 4): How was the appropriateness of the initial team membership and management routines confirmed?

CHANGES (IF ANY)HOW WAS APPROPRIATENESS CONFIRMED

Stakeholder Analysis Forming, Storming, Norming

& Performing Need for Technical Training in

Solution Development Phase

No Change

Routines approved by MRCRoutine checks done on Planned v/s ActualsRoutine checks done on Proposed v/s Actuals

timelinesMoM published for all meetings conductedEmail sign-off on each phase completionGovernance Portal to check actual progress

Timelines modified due to internal factors

35

Initial Team Membership

Management Routines Project Plan Phase Start Date End Date






Solution/Improvement Development

SECTION #3

19

Possible Solutions or Improvements3.1.0

3.1.1.(CQ 1): What methods and/or tools were used to identify the possible solutions/improvements? 3.1.1 (CQ 2): Why were these methods and/or tools selected? 3.1.1 (CQ 3): How was the team prepared to use the methods and/or tools?

TOOLS USED TO IDENTIFY POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Brainstorming Benchmarking Focus Group Discussion

WHY WAS THE TOOL USED

To generate ideas so as team can come up with long term and better solutions

To understand and adept good practices from across the industry

To align stakeholders and get expert opinion

HOW WAS THE TEAM PREPARED TO USE THE TOOLS

Members meet for 2 Days –

4 hrs each

TRADE Methodology Members meet for 2 Days –4 hrs each

37

TOOLS USED TO IDENTIFY POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS


3.1.2 (CQ 1): What data was generated and how was the data analysed to determine the possible solutions/improvements?

Scatter

Diagram

Affinity

Diagram

Multivoting

38

SCATTER DIAGRAM

AFFINITY DIAGRAM

MULTIVOTINGGroup Judgement were used to narrow down the

list of possible solutions

To identify potential RC through correlating relationship between customer snags and causes

listed in C-SAT survey

Possible solutions generated from Brain storming were grouped based on their

relationship in work process

How was data

analysed

SME and Technical Experts inputs supported solutions

proposed

Practises from across the

industry supported

solutions proposed

Data Generated

20

Possible Solutions Identified


3.1.2 (CQ 2): What are the possible solutions/improvements? 3.1.2 (CQ 3): What evidence showed that the solutions/improvements identified were possible instead of final?

Evidence of solution possible but not Final

Technical Validation

would be done through

Mockups

Solutions would be based

on Customer Validation

and Feedback

Stakeholder approval

would be taken to

support solutions

proposed

39

26

Final Solutions or Improvements3.2.0

3.2.1 (CQ 1): What methods and/or tools were used to identify the final solution(s)/improvement(s)? 3.2.1 (CQ 2): Why were these methods and/or tools selected? 3.2.1 (CQ 3): How was the team prepared to use the methods and/or tools?

40

TOOLS USED

WHY WERE THESE TOOLS SELECTED

HOW WAS THE TEAM PREPARED TO USE THE TOOLS

To check the viability of the solution

To narrow the list of solutions and built

consensus on it

Trail run of the actual solution on the sample

base to validate & verify

To involve the customer & get first hand review

Cross Functional Team discussion

Pilot Testing the Solution

Pilot Testing the Solution

Cross Functional Team discussion

Customer ValidationFocus Group Discussion Mock upMulti Voting

21

SOLUTION SELECTION MATRIX


3.2.2 (CQ 1): How were the methods and/or tools used to determine the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

41

Critical To Quality (CTQ) Impact

TimeImpact

Cost Impact

Potential Resistance

Detrimental Effect on EHS

02

01

03

04

05

Material & workmanship issues in flooring tiles

Solution

Critical to Quality (CTQ)

Impact

Cost Impact

Time Impact

Potential Resistance

Detrimental Effect on

EHS

Total Score

Use of roto printed tiles

2 4 3 4 3 16

Selection of right grouting material

3 4 3 4 3 17

Avoiding use of spacers for TVHL projects

2 1 1 2 3 9

Legend

5 being highest , and 1 being lowest

Prioritising Quality

Verifying time

Verifying cost

Minimizing resistance

Verifying environment

and norms


3.2.2 (CQ 2): What was (were) the final solution(s)/improvement(s)?

Material Related: 5 SolutionsMR01 Formation of Marble CFT

MR02 Selection of right grouting material

MR03 in marble selection process

MR04 Use of factory finished doors shutters & frames

MR05 Use of roto printed tiles to avoid shade variation

People Related: 2 SolutionsPE01 Proper testing of operations before handover to customer & role of QA & QC and MEP is redefined

PE02 Responsibility in checklist is well defined with a sign-off, employee code mentioned

Process Related: 12 SolutionsPR01 Avoiding use of tile spacers for TVHL projects

PR02 Batch wise use of tiles & maintaining additional buffer stock for each batch

PR03 Deep cleaning to be done by professional FM agency & to be cross verified by random inspection before handover

PR04 Door activity to be done as a last work & periodic maintenance of installed hardware at ongoing projects

PR05 Finishing material Protection guidelines deployed & added as separate item to BOQ

PR06 MEP system Design needs to be revisited and tested during mock-up stage

PR07 Method statement & checklists updated for adding sorting of tiles at time of laying

PR08 New checkpoint for primer application added in checklist to ensure proper application

PR09 Selection of Granite, uniform color and shade granite selection as per standardized checklist

PR10 Stage passing system adopted to get clearance from interfacing activities.

PR11 Adding a separate checkpoint for gap filling in door frame checklist

PR12 Use of template / temporary sub-frame to ensure opening in line & level

PE

PR

People Related

Process Related

MRMaterial Related

Legend

LIST OF FINAL SOLUTIONS & IMPROVEMENTS

42

LIST OF FINAL SOLUTIONS & IMPROVEMENTS

19

22


3.2.3 (CQ 1): How were the final solution(s)/improvement(s) validated?

43

26 Identified Solution

22 Shortlisted Solution

Validation of Solution

19 Final Solution

Solutions mapped to root causes

19 Final solutions:5 = Material Related2 = People Related12 = Process Related

Mock-up, was used for pilot testing and customer validation

Possible shortlisted solutions


3.2.3 (CQ 2): What evidence showed that validation was performed prior to implementation?

44

S# Possible SolutionsValidation

Remarks (if any)QAQC Site Exe MEP

1 Batch wise sorting of tiles before use Yes Yes - Incorporated in Checklist

2 Implementation of protection guidelines Yes Yes - Incorporated in guidelines

3 Maintaining batch wise buffer stock for tiles Yes Yes - Buffer stock records at site

4 Adherence to activities sequence Yes Yes - Stage passing register

5Temporary sub-frame / template for opening sizes

Yes Yes - Work orders issued

6 Employee code & sign on de-snagging checklist Yes Yes - MOM of Feb’17 TRC

7Deep cleaning through professional deep cleaning agency

Yes Yes - At Primanti phase-1 project

8Role of MEP & QAQC teams defined in handing over process

Yes - YesHanding over process

annexure

Validation Process

Technical Validation

would be done through

Mock-ups

Solutions would be

based on Customer

Validation and Feedback

Stakeholder approvals

would be taken to

support solutions

proposed

23


3.2.4 (CQ 1): What additional potential benefits were anticipated from the final solution(s)/improvement(s)? 3.2.4 (CQ 2): Were the additional benefits anticipated prior to implementation?

45

ADDITIONAL BENEFITS EXPECTED FROM THE FINAL SOLUTIONS

Improvement in Work Productivity

Reducing handover delays

EXPECTED BEFORE

Yes

Yes


3.2.5 (CQ 1): What data was generated and how was the data analysed to justify why the chosen final solution(s)/improvement(s) should be implemented? 3.2.5 (CQ 2): What evidences showed that justification was performed prior to implementation?

46

Validation CriteriaMock Up / Pilot Testing

Customer FeedbackSME FeedbackData Analysis

Number of Customer Complaints – Post Handover

TATA HOUSING QUALITY HALLMARK RATING SYSTEM - AUDIT SUMMARY REPORT

Project Name:PRIMANTI,GURGAON-PHASE-2

Audit Date: 17-07-2017 to 19-07-2017

Audit Code : QA&QC/THQH/FY17-18/CFT-A1

Auditee: Lovenish Aggarwal

Auditor: Tamil Jayaraman

AUDIT LOGS - DESIGN DETAIL

Wall Finish (Above Dado) height(ATD)

Y/N FAIL PASS

MODERATE

Above dado patch works to look clean even its above FC. Chipping and buffing required for clean surface.

EXF- 18-Master Bedroom T5/2nd Floor/ Unit 2- Toilet 1

Count of Status of Complaint Column Labels

Row Labels Service Type Category Closed Open Grand Total

Maintenance Complaint AC 37 37

Alu Windows 50 50

Carpentry 23 23

Civil 1 1

Electrical 124 5 129

Electricity 1 1

Equipment 30 30

Hardware 5 5

Home Automation 11 2 13

Housekeeping 75 75

Landscaping/Garden 3 3

Miscellaneous 47 47

Pest Control 1 1

Plumbing 123 123

Request Electrical 1 1

Housekeeping 4 4

Miscellaneous 1 1

Maintenance Total 535 9 544

Project Complaint AC 36 36

Alu Windows 17 1 18

Carpentry 53 1 54

Civil 99 2 101

Design 7 7

Electrical 25 25

Equipment 3 3

Hardware 1 1

Home Automation 12 12

Landscaping/Garden 1 1

Leakage/Seepage 5 5

Miscellaneous 8 8

Painting 5 2 7

Plumbing 30 1 31

Request Design 1 1

Plumbing 2 2

Project Total 303 9 312

Grand Total 838 18 856

Non Conformance (NC) data from Quality Audits

DATA GENERATED & ANALYZED PILOT TESTING

JUSTIFICATION PERFORMED

24

Project Plan

Phase Start Date End Date






THROUGH TOLL GATE REVIEW THE CORRECTNESS OF THE PROJECT SCOPE, DELIVERABLES AND TIMINGS WERE CHECKED


3.3.1 (CQ1): How was the correctness of the initial or updated project scope, deliverables, and timing confirmed?

Reviews with Champion / Mentor

Project Timelines Check

47

Project Team

Sponsor: Brotin Banerjee

Member:Amogh Bhave

Champion:Alcide Coelho

Member:Mahendra Pawar

Mentor:Sachin Garg

Member:Sagar Patil

Project Leader:Sameer Jorwekar

Project Scope Check


3.3.1 (CQ 2): How were stakeholders involved and/or communicated with during the solution/improvement phase of the project?

Stakeholders What they did How they did


- Review Progress of the Team- Support in change in scope & addition of new resources Monthly Project Meeting

2. Project Team- Analysis of Data- Brainstorming sessions Weekly Project Meeting

3. Engineering- Involvement in Brainstorming sessions- Multi-voting sessions

Timely update of task planned vs task completed

4. Design- Involved in Benchmarking- Site visits for capturing & documenting best practices

Communication on monthly basis for necessary actions required

5. Marketing & Sales- Involved in capturing feedback on Mock-ups & prioritising actions

Email communication of each deployment plan & site visits

6. CRM- Involved in capturing feedback on Mock-ups & prioritising actions

Email communication of each deployment plan & site visits

7. Finance - Approve and allocate additional budget as requiredSupport in finance, contracts, budgeting and costing

8. Customer- Inspection of Mock-up units & feedback on the actions deployed Voice of Customers

48

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT DURING IMPROVEMENT PHASE

25


3.3.1 (CQ 3): What stakeholder resistance was identified and/or addressed in this phase of the project?

49

STAKEHOLDER RESISTANCE

STAKEHOLDER GROUP


2. Project Team 3. Engineering 4. Design5. Marketing &

Sales6. CRM 7. Finance 8. Customer

No Resistance No Resistance For increase in supervision was

required for additional

checkpoints

Approval in CDTF

No Resistance No Resistance No Resistance No Resistance

STAKEHOLDER RESISTANCE ADDRESSED

Incorporation of regular checkpoint & checked during

audits

Regular meetings for

giving technical inputs

NA NA NA NA NA NA


3.3.1 (CQ 4): How was the appropriateness of the initial or updated team membership and management routines confirmed?

50

Initial Team Membership

Management Routines

Are the team members appropriate for the project now?

Do we add additional team members?

Not required as the team was in sync on the analysis and action to be taken

Team member from Technical training function added

Is the frequency of team meetings & MRC review appropriate?

Do we need to do any changes?

Current schedule was enough

EVALUTION DECISION/ RECOMMENDATION

26

Implementation and Results Verification

SECTION #4

Stakeholder Considerations in Implementation4.1.0

4.1.1 (CQ 1): How were stakeholders involved in planning the solution/improvement implementation? 4.1.1 (CQ 2): How were stakeholders involved in implementing the solution/improvement?

52

Stakeholder Group

Involvement in planningthe implementation

Involvement in implementing the solution


Monthly project review along with key actionable ▪ Validation & Signoff of Solutions & Process changes

2. Project TeamPerforming Root cause analysis, Brainstorming and Strategy planning for effective implementation

▪ Providing Trainings at project site ▪ Monitoring the Mock-up units and other action plans

3. EngineeringPerforming Root cause analysis, Brainstorming and Strategy planning for effective implementation

▪ Identification of SPOC per project & addressing issues faced by contractors in implementing solutions

▪ Providing weekly updates to project team & monthly updates in PRM to senior management

4. DesignSolution generation through benchmarking and preparing design guidelines

▪ Training site team in understanding the best practices & revised project design guidelines

5. Marketing & Sales

Quarterly meeting for providing updates & further action planning

▪ Planning customers site visit for inspection of Mock-up units & capturing customer feedback

6. CRMQuarterly meeting for providing updates & further action planning

▪ Planning customers site visit for inspection of Mock-up units & capturing customer feedback

7. FinanceUpdates on action to be taken on finance requirement as and when required

▪ Financial validation & justification of solutions implemented

8. Customer Visit to Mock up units ▪ Customer Feedback & VOC

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION

27


4.1.2 (CQ 1): What was done to anticipate resistance before it occurred?

53

➢ Tollgate reviews were conducted with project sponsor & champion after completion of each phase

➢ Stakeholders concerns were discussed & addressed during internal reviews

➢ Tollgate reviews were conducted with project sponsor & champion after completion of each phase

➢ Each team/department, evaluated to classify them as blockers, advocates and indifferent.

➢ Email approval were taken from each stakeholders for all important decisions taken in the project

➢ Same methodology was used for tollgate reviews and solution implementation plan

Tollgate Review Stakeholder Analysis Phase wise email approval


4.1.2 (CQ 2): What types of resistance were actually encountered during the course of solution/improvement implementation? 4.1.2 (CQ 3): How was the actual resistance identified?

54

To attend defects/ rectification

Difficulty in capturing cost of reworks and minimize it

Poor workmanship & defects caused due to negligence in supervision

Material protection guidelines ignored & neglected

TYPE OF RESISTANCE HOW WAS IT IDENTIFIED

▪ Delayed action on audit non conformities report

▪ Identified in Project MIS & Non Conformance (NC) reports

▪ Identified in Quality audit reports▪ RCA of NC’s captured in MIS

▪ Not included as line item/part of BOQ specification ▪ Identified as Major root cause in Critical issues of Monthly

Project Review Meetings (PRM)

01

02

03

04

28

4.1.3 (CQ 1): How was the actual resistance addressed?


55

HOW WAS IT ADDRESSED

▪ Engineering to certify and release audit report after all checks completed across all parameters

▪ Increasing awareness within engineering team on Cost of rework through a COPQ training exercise by external Consultant & making it mandatory to capture the same in Monthly MIS

▪ Tool Box Talks & OJT to workforce conducted▪ Contractor Performance evaluation after every 06 Months▪ Providing technical training as well as behavioral training to site

supervisors

▪ Head Engineering briefing during project review meetings and customer centricity presentation in technical review meeting.

▪ Customer satisfaction added to goal sheet and consequence management framework launched.

01

02

03

04

To attend defects/ rectification

Difficulty in capturing cost of reworks and minimize it

Poor workmanship & defects caused due to negligence in supervision

Material protection guidelines ignored & neglected

TYPE OF RESISTANCE


4.1.3 (CQ 2): How did the team know it was successful in addressing the resistance?

56

79%

87%85%

95%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

FY 16-17 (H1) FY 16-17 (H2)

Productivity Score of FY 16-17

Productivity Score Civil Productivity Score Finishing

702

531

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Internal Audits External Audit

Number of NC's Observed in Quality Audits of FY 16-17

IMPROVEMENT IN WORK PRODUCTIVITY

29


4.1.4 (CQ 1): What was the evidence of stakeholder group buy-in? 4.1.4 (CQ 2): What evidence showed that buy-in was obtained prior to implementation?

57

Prior to implementation

Stakeholder Group Degree Evidence of buy-in

1. Management Committee HighApprovals in budget & process changes

2. Project Team HighAcceptance of solutions and quick implementation on-site

3. Engineering High Acceptance of solutions and spreading awareness to contractors on changes in work processes

4. Design MediumAcceptance of the decision for design improvement

5. Marketing & Sales HighAcceptance of project decisions and providing priority list of units to be handed over

6. CRM HighAcceptance of project decisions and providing priority list of units to be handed over

7. Finance HighApproval of budget for technical training and COPQ exercise by involving external consultant

8. Customer High Positive feedback provided post Mock-up unit visit

Degree of buy in: High - High Acceptance Medium – Acknowledges the Change Low - Does not accept the change

Stakeholder group buy-in

57

Material Protection Guidelines built to ensure

longer shelf life of raw material.

Engineering Process improvised process built with

defined expectations and output.

Solution/Improvement Implementation4.2.0

4.2.1 (CQ 1): What process(es) or system(s) were changed or created to implement the solution/improvement?

Mobile Application built to ensure real time data

capture and faster reporting.

Quality Hallmark Rating System built to inculcate ‘First Time Right Culture’.

58

30

Periodic on-site quality audits

Bonus/Penalty linked with quality ratings vis-a-vis contractor performance evaluation

Detailed performance measures in the engineering process

Detailed checkpoints under each audit category

Solution/Improvement Implementation4.2.0

4.2.1 (CQ 2): What systems were changed or created to measure and manage the performance of the implementation?

Checkpoint

59

Project Results4.3.0

4.3.1 (CQ 1): What were the results? 4.3.1 (CQ 2): How did the results compare to the specific project goals/measures from Item 2.1.1?

60

Percentage of units handed over without Snags

FY 16-17 (Q2) FY 17-18 (Q2)

80%

90%

FY 16-17(Q3) FY 17-18 (Q2)

62%

80%

Product Quality CSAT

31


4.3.2 (CQ 1): What additional benefits were realized from the project? 4.3.2 (CQ 2): How did the team measure any of the additional benefits that were “soft”?

61

Customer complaint per unit

Top 2 Boxes Score Additional Revenue Timely Collection

ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

Customer Referrals CollectionsReduction in customer

complaintsLiving in experience

“SOFT” Benefits were lower customer complaint rate

120 Crores 97%2 per unit85%


4.3.2 (CQ 3): How do the actual additional benefits that were realized compare to the expected additional benefits identified in Item 3.2.4?

62

Additional Benefits Baseline AchievedMeasurement Metrix

Improvement in Work Productivity

Reducing handover delay

88%

101 days

93%

67 days

Productivity Report

Average Delays

32

Sustaining and Communicating Results

SECTION #5

Sustaining Results Over Time5.1.0

5.1.1 (CQ 1): What was done to make sure the process or system changes made during the implementation (Item 4.2.1) continued to be followed?

64

Monitoring and Presenting results onmonthly basis

Regular and periodic audits at interval of 4 months

Periodic Trainings at site as per revised Technical Training Modules

Identifying Project Heir to ensure implementation & reporting of results

Process Training on revised processes at Project sites

Documentation of action plans and revision of existing SOPs

Sust

ain

abili

ty P

lan

33


5.1.1 (CQ 2): What evidence showed that this became part of the organization’s culture/operating strategy?

65

Tata Best Practice AwardCommunication of initiatives & sharing improvement

Sharing best practices at centralized portal

Documentation of best practices

Weekly communication of revised technical SOP

NEW PROCESS BECAMES ORGANIZATION'S CULTURE

• Documentation of new processes

done

• Process circulars shared on a

centralized process control unit

• Monthly Q-Connect (Con-call) with

Project Team Members

• Communicating revised Technical

SOP’s on weekly basis & ensuring

employee participation through

periodic events

• Sharing best practice on Company’s

Employee portal

• Encouraging participation in change

through recognition


5.1.2 (CQ 1): What was done to make sure the benefits obtained from the implementation will be maintained?

66

Revision of SOPs

Standard Operating procedures & method statements were revised to include new processes. Revised SOPs are well drafted with easy language and clear demarcation of roles, responsibilities and actionable to be performed.

Updated processes are uploaded on company intranet portal making it easily accessible to all employees.

Changes in Technical training module and trade test

Existing workforce as well as the new hires are inducted on Quality module and its requirements. Training on trade specific modules is completed before actual execution of work at site.Same is implemented for all new procedures.

Governance & Monthly Reviews

Data with process deviations (if any) is recorded in monthly Quality MIS by respective Project Heads, containing root causes for occurrence of the deviations.

Same is shared with all projects as a learning report in monthly PRM.

Creating sensitivity & awareness at project sites

Do’s & Don’ts along with sequential set of activities is displayed in regional languages at all prominent locations at the project site, to create sensitivity & awareness within the workforce.

Implementation through Internal Audits

In order to ensure all the actions plans Monitoring are holistically implemented, the same is reviewed during internal quality audit lifecycle.

Sam

ple

s

34


5.1.2 (CQ 2): What evidence showed that this became part of the organization’s culture/operating strategy?

67

Function-wise Performance Tracking on Monthly Basis

Function specific key measures are incorporated in Functional Balance Score cards (BSC) and its performance is tracked on monthly BSC reviews as well as quarterly senior mgt.

Ensured Responsibility & Accountability

Effectiveness measures of the revised processes & method statements has been incorporated in Project teams Goal sheet as one of the KRA to ensure responsibility & 100% deployment.

Database of Best Practices

Collated database of best Practices identified has been prepared and published in book formant for circulation. Same is also made available on Intranet Portal.

Tracking Implementation

Implementation of the action plans is tracked & reviewed during periodic Internal Quality audits, improvement areas identified and conveyed to project teams as and when required.

EVIDENCE THAT THE IMPROVED PROCESS HAS BECAME PART OF ORGANIZATION’S CULTURE

Communication of Results5.2.0

5.2.1 (CQ 1): How did the team communicate the results to the various stakeholders groups?

68

Communication of initiatives & improvement methods through mail

Sharing best practices on centralized company portal

Weekly communication of revised technical SOP documents

35

69

1. Integration of First Time Right in design, contracts & engineering2. Continual technical training to contractors, workforce and front-line staff for upskilling and reskilling3. Internal stakeholder alignment for common cause & effective communication of learnings

KEY LEARNINGS

What went wellCross functional

team workSustainable

effectiveness results

Success in changing the mindset of the engineering team

Support of senior management in

implementation of action plans

Training to

employees on

Six Sigma Green

& Yellow Belt

What could be better

Use of StatisticalTools

Thank You

Parivartan - ASQ...PARIVARTAN First Time Right, Long Time Right 2 a global business group with...

Documents

Transcript of Parivartan - ASQ...PARIVARTAN First Time Right, Long Time Right 2 a global business group with...