Top 5 Software Testing Certifications

Software Testing has helped a lot of ventures to evaluate and verify the quality of every software component so that the software can respond aptly to different inputs of stakeholders. Besides, the techniques, associated with the testing of programming, driver, or application software involve risks which, can run intentionally or intentionally in different environments. Those risks need to be remediated proactively and for doing that, businesses must have that production unit acquiring an overall knowledge of the practical implementation of risk analysis [which is an imperative part of Software Testing].

You may think about the demand for a software tester at this instance. Yes, the requirement is humongous and will always be till the creation and maintenance of software will occur!! Either you plan dynamic or static testing, you need to bring the quality testing practices on the table and for doing that, this becomes necessary – certified testers with recognition through certification by reputed institutions. Let’s take a look at top software testing certifications which won’t only land a high-paying job for you but also help the ventures reduce the risks so that their software may gain acceptance from their customers globally.

1. CAST (Certified Associate in Software Testing)

This certification can professionally identify the ability of an applicant or a candidate while demonstrating the software testing principles and their quality practices at a foundational level. Some prerequisites are there like: –

◉ 3 or 4 years degree from college-level [accredited] institution 

◉ 2 years degree from college-level [accredited] institution + 1-year experience in the IT services field 

◉ 3 years experience in the IT services field 

From the above, you must possess any ONE OF those for qualifying the candidacy of CAST. The fee of this certification is 100 US Dollars and one can pay this online after reading the payment terms carefully. Apart from all this, the certification will test your knowledge in various skill areas. They will be like how one can build ST i.e Software Testing ecosystem keeping in mind the conditions and influences surrounding, your vocabulary about methods and approaches of ST, managing the allotted software project through communication, monitoring, staffing, budgeting, and scheduling. Also, there are some other skill areas such as the magnitude of risk(s) associated with the lifecycle of the deployment current software system, designing of the test cases (like black-box), checkpoint reviews and the required exceptions, testing of the assimilated specialized technologies of mobile applications or cloud-based applications, and reporting of the tests after collecting the metrics and graphs of the data interpreted.

2. CSQA (Certified Software Quality Analyst Certification)

This certification will let you receive recognition since the candidature is identified and evaluated on the grounds of a professional level of competence. Such competence is regarding the knowledge about the practices and principles of QA i.e. Quality Assurance used in Software Testing. Undoubtedly, one needs to ethically note these prerequisites down, and they start with: –

◉ 4-year degree from college-level [accredited] institution + 2 years experience in the IT services field 

◉ 3-year degree from college-level [accredited] institution + 3 years experience in the IT services field 

◉ 2-year degree from college-level [accredited] institution + 4 years experience in the IT services field 

◉ 6 years experience in the IT services field. 

From the above, you need to acquire any ONE from those for letting your candidacy qualify. In spite of all these four pre-requisites, the fee of CSQA certification is 350 US Dollars or $450. You must access the payment policy section for knowing accurately about the terms and conditions. Indeed, the certification will be testing your knowledge about assessing the software products and the connected services in accordance with the concepts and principles of Quality Assurance; defining, implementing, and improving the quality control leadership initiatives aligning with the behavior and commitment with management, assessing the baselines of software modules so that the organizations can proactively measure the overall customer satisfaction well. Not only this but also the knowledge, about outsourcing and COTS in the internal control audits, is cross-examined that can simplify the addressed quality assurance plans.

3. International Software Testing Qualifications Board (ISTQB) Certification

This certification is most widely recognized for software testing at a foundational level as well as an advanced level. Currently, expert-level certification is being developed. For all these levels, the working groups of ISTQB are operating internationally so that the candidates can prepare well for the roles like software testers, test managers, test analysts, IT directors, and QA managers i.e. quality assurance managers. In the foundational level (one module), you may either opt for the Foundational Level Core certification or Foundational Level Specialist certification. Similarly, the advanced level (three modules) is divided into Advanced Level Core certification and Advanced Level Specialist Certification. For the candidates willing to receive advanced level certification, they must possess the Foundational one. If we talk about the fees, the foundational level certification costs 229 US Dollars while each of the advanced level ISQB certification costs $249. 

Both these certifications will test your knowledge about the fundamentals of testing and quality assurance; defects, effects, and root causes of test processes, tasks, and work products, basic to the mid-level understanding of the lifecycle of software testing i.e. STLC, configuration management of the automated and agile test cases. Other than the above, tools and techniques for estimating risks (related to testing) and tracking the behavior and development of work products will be included in ISTQB certification. With this, applicants all around the world can plan and schedule the test strategies so that they help businesses progressively develop the deliverables in accordance with the key project requirements.  

4. Certified Quality Engineer (CQE)

The certification for CQE costs around 498 US Dollars and has an examination in two modes. The first one is computer-delivered (in English) which has 175 Questions in total which you need to complete in 5 hours 18 minutes. From those, 160 questions are multiple-choice type i.e. MCQ, and 15 questions are unscored which means they won’t impact your final marks. On the other side, the paper-and-pencil examination (in English, Portuguese, Spanish, Mandarin, and Korean in certain locations) for Certified Quality Engineer has 160 questions that need to be completed in 5 hours. Before getting enrolled in CQE certification, you must have 8 years of experience in one or more areas of CQE or a minimum of 3 years of experience (full-time, paid role as an intern or employee) in the decision-making position (i.e you are involved with the execution and controlling of quality inspection processes) in any of its areas. 

There will be a variability in the set of topics asked like notions of service quality control and evaluation of products’ principles; development and analysis of statistical models, human factors correctly diagnosing the metrology of management information systems. Rather than these, the certification will document your critical skills related to validation and verification of sampling, distributions, and capability studies based on the hypothetical statistics of risk assessment and its acceptance.          

5. Certified Manager of Software Testing (CMST)

This certification assesses the capabilities and competencies of the applicants inclined towards software testing. Soon, they will be working at the ST management level. If one wants to be on the qualifying list of CMST’s candidacy, then any ONE from these three prerequisites must be fulfilled:

◉ Bachelor’s degree in Computer Science or another field of engineering from a college-level [accredited] institution + 4 years of experience in ST field 

◉ Associate Degree + 6 years of experience in ST field 

◉ 8 years of experience in the ST field. 

Besides, there are 100 Multiple Choice Questions from which the candidate must answer 70 correctly for passing CMST certification whose fee is 450 US Dollars. On an overall basis, this certification will assess your candidature on grounds of resource planning, traceability, and controlling of various test processes, implementing and designing the product which will meet the requirements of the customers, and maintenance of releases somewhere related to the quality standards of this competitive market.  

Source: geeksforgeeks.org

Continue reading

Combine Machine Learning with Lean Six Sigma

“Why?” It’s a question that Lean Six Sigma (LSS) practitioners know well. It’s the provocation that has led to transformations across industries. And, when it comes to machine learning solutions, it’s the prompt that has been to both the benefit and to the detriment of implementing them into operations.

A Trend with Challenges

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are not new concepts. The use of computer algorithms to achieve a particular goal while simultaneously improving themselves has been explored since the mid-1900s.

Although glorified concepts and creative applications of AI/ML principles permeate history, it wasn’t until the late 2010s that the application of machine learning in operations (MLOps) gained traction, and industry professionals collaborated with AI/ML experts to pilot and scale solutions to address gaps in business performance. Corporate objectives – such as increasing demand forecast accuracy, manufacturing self-driving vehicles and evaluating company financials to improve EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) performance – have all seen significant progress in recent years as a result of AI/ML.

With so many applications wherein AI/ML solutions can drive business transformation, how does the question of “Why?” become such a detractor from the success of ML models within operations? As it turns out, one of the most persistent problems that plague ML solutions is model “explainability.” Within a production environment, if we are unable to explain the output of a model (a situation often called black box ML), how do we know what inputs or variables serve as the root cause of a problem? How do we determine our why?

What’s Your Tradeoff?

The question presents an interesting value proposition for LSS professionals and businesses. Do you sacrifice model performance, such as accuracy or speed, for the ability to explain a model result? Or do you forego the visibility into the drivers of a particular output in exchange for an assumed increase in model performance?

As an example, when building an ML-based model to predict demand for a particular product, which solution offers the greatest value to the business:

1. A model that may not provide the highest forecast accuracy as possible but still provides a thorough understanding into model inputs that allows stakeholders to quickly course-correct any ill-performing components of the model, or

2. A model that theoretically maximizes forecast accuracy but leaves the business blind to immediate actions it can take to rectify any issues for which the model output is responsible?

One could justifiably argue that the choice is a riddle of sorts; however, from an LSS standpoint, the answer is simple: the strategic direction should be to gravitate toward explainable models.

MLOps Through a Continuous Improvement Lens

When we understand the why behind operational challenges, we position ourselves to best maneuver unanticipated, adverse effects coming as a result of a strategic decision, scaled solution or some variable that went unaccounted for. This sets the foundation for every continuous improvement analysis – taking the why and enhancing the value stream to mitigate (or eliminate) the unfavorable impacts that are attributed to the why.

As practitioners of continuous improvement, if pressing toward an explainable model is the guidance, how do we develop a solution that introduces a new capability into business operations while still maintaining the necessary insight we need – insight into the why – to enable continued transformation? The answer is the same as it has always been – by starting with the problem.

Once we know the problem, we can begin the discovery phase of identifying and mapping the end-to-end value stream of the issue we are searching to resolve. This is where every transformation should begin as it will provide clarity to the why behind questions such as:

◉ What is the motivating key performance indicator (KPI)?
◉ What technologies exist and, more importantly, what technologies are appropriate to solve this specific challenge?
◉ How will the technology be applied?

For example, when defining various countermeasures to address the business challenge of decreasing, or at least smoothing, erratic overtime labor spend that is currently required to support operations, two intuitive solutions could be to:

1. Use robotic process automation (RPA) to automate manual activities performed, or
2. Leverage ML to forecast processing volume to help optimally plan the labor need.

In the scenario above, the driving KPI is labor spend and the two technologies that could be appropriately applied are RPA and ML. What’s more, we’ve mapped a method for how the technologies are to be used depending on which solution is preferred.

Data: The Achilles’ Heel of AI and ML

Identifying the problem and mapping the current-state way of working also sets the foundation for the lifeline of all ML models – data. No ML initiative can be successful without data. As an extension, having the right data makes all the difference.

Take for example the situation in which a model exhibited racial bias and discrimination against African Americans when it came to receiving healthcare services or the model that demonstrated a gender bias when determining lines of credit for the Apple Card. An added example would be an AI model that threatens equal employment opportunity by disqualifying older applicants, those who may suffer from depression or career hopefuls who are on the autism spectrum. While the bases of these models may have been ethical and honorable, the data used to build and train the models resulted in outputs that came under public scrutiny when placed in operations.

Because end results have the potential to be so far removed from their anticipated purpose, it is of critical importance to understand the as-is data landscape in preparation for the to-be data ecosystem.

◉ What is the problem we are looking solve?
◉ How does data tie into the process?
◉ What datasets are we using?
◉ How is the data used?
◉ How does the data influence the output?
◉ What message is the data communicating?

The list goes on but questions like these are the data-related queries that will help facilitate an understanding of the current-state process and identify data gaps that will need to be addressed in the ideal, transformed future-state process. Getting to this level of detail is all the more critical when you think about how data-preparation and data-wrangling activities will consume an estimated 80 percent the time dedicated to an AI/ML project.

After performing the gap analysis between the current state and target condition, there should be clear line of sight to the menu of datasets required to elevate operational performance – the datasets that will allow us to understand why a model performs the way it does.

Model Consumption: A Visual Factory for MLOps

Dashboards and visual reporting tools are all but necessary components to the visual factory – the same can be said for ML solutions purposed for operations. If information from the model isn’t presented in a form that can be easily digested to generate actionable business processes, operational implementation of the AI/ML solution is destined to fail.

Consider a quick example of the visual factory from a traditional LSS perspective. A graphical display of green, yellow or red may indicate whether a piece of equipment is functioning optimally, is in need of preventative maintenance or has reached critical failure, respectively. To that end, depending on the visual cue, a certain business process may follow – whether it’s performing the necessary maintenance or replacing the equipment altogether. Regarding AI/ML solutions, though, if the customer of the model does not have any indication as to whether the output is acceptable or not, the solution falls short of its fundamental objective: to deliver a true business transformation.

The consumption layer, the component of ML-based solutions that visually depicts an output, is the third and final piece to an AI/ML solution, which is also comprised of a data layer (where data is structured and stored) and a modeling layer (where the model code exists), as shown in the figure below.

The consumption layer is the aspect of the solution that equips process owners with the information essential to effectively managing business processes in transformed state, to take a prescribed action against a particular output. The data layer represents pulling raw data form data sources and performing ETL (extract, transfer, load) processes into landing zones. The modeling layer is the component of the solution that applies logic and business rules to data before it is passed to the consumption layer – where model outputs are presented in visual dashboards for business process management.

Solution Architecture for ML Models

The consumption layer can manifest itself through several various mediums. This can be as simple as a spreadsheet-based report and chart, or a more complex dashboard built using a data visualization tool such as Tableau of Microsoft Power BI. In either case, though, the visual output is accompanied by a standardized business process to execute as conditions dictate.

A Welcome Addition to the LSS Toolkit

At a time when corporations are focused on creating new ways of working and generating new capabilities to elevate their business models, business transformation sets the stage for a new landscape to apply continuous improvement principles. Who better to lead these breakthrough initiatives other than LSS professionals?

If you were to ask me if I am a data scientist or if I am well-versed in Python (programming language), I would answer with a clear and definitive “No.” The next question to follow may naturally be then, why is it that I am tasked with leading or consulting on a multitude of AI and ML projects? It’s because, outside of possessing a strong (and growing) understanding of the capabilities of various “exponential technologies,” I start with why.

Starting with why allows you to define the problem in the simplest form possible – a crucial measure when dealing with already complex business challenges and technologies. The why will help you understand the full value stream of the operational process and how the appropriate technology may apply – a necessary step when performing the gap analysis and designing the ideal future state.

A why will shape the business requirements of an output needed to act on model results – a mandatory component of the solution before deploying a model.

Your why can be the strongest tool you have in successfully implementing an AI/ML solution into operations to deliver a business transformation.

Continue reading

Six Sigma Certification, Who Can Do It?

Six Sigma certification questions continue to roll into my inbox. While I can’t find time to answer each email with a tremendous amount of detail, I can and do save them for answering in an article such as this.

Can My Company Certify Six Sigma Yellow/Green/Black/Master Black Belts?

Six Sigma certification is a funny concept. Everyone wants to be certified, but nobody really understands what it means in the industry and how it might enhance your resume outside your current company.

There isn’t a single certification body for Six Sigma. Because of this, you’ll find certification options from consulting companies (like the one that probably trained and certified the first wave in your business) and ASQ, as well as from businesses like Motorola, Allied Signal, GE, and many others. Each of these businesses has different certification criteria. And so to answer this question, the answer is Yes. Yes, you can certify anyone you want to any standards you think are appropriate. Provide instruction, test for knowledge and hand out certificates.

But the question should not be “Can I certify Green or Black Belts in my company?”, the real question should be “What is the true value of all these certifications?”

◉ What is the value of the content being instructed?
◉ How well is the content being instructed?
◉ Does the content cover all pertinent aspects of Quality and management that every change agent should know?
◉ Has the content not only been learned, but been put into practice and successfully utilized?
◉ Has the knowledge of individuals been tested to acceptable levels?
◉ Have processes been defined, measured, analyzed, improved and controlled for the better of the organization?

Ok, now that I have that idealist thinking of my system, let’s get to what I feel is the true question that people should be asking, “What is the street value of the certification?” Why do I say street value? Because that’s where the rubber hits the road and you show what you know and what you don’t.

For example, no business is going to hire a graduate of Wharton (arguably the most prestigious business school in the U.S.) without asking her to explain business concepts or to apply a model to a hypothetical business situation. Sure she comes with a pedigree from a top 5 institution, but these types of questions help the hiring manager evaluate the candidate’s level of understanding. Similarly, a Quality manager interviewing a Black Belt or Master Black Belt candidate is going to ask how she facilitated a difficult team meeting, to explain what a Z value is, and to differentiate and explain the p values associated with a recent project. That is the true test of a person’s Six Sigma value to the organization.

Finally, wouldn’t it be nice if everyone was valued for the contributions they have made or will make to the business? The fact is that pedigrees are important to people — which is exactly why this certification question came up in the first place. Since there aren’t any independent firms determining the “value” of certification from the many available sources as is the case with MBA schools, the question becomes more difficult to answer. In my opinion, the closer you are to professional instruction coupled with rigorous application the more value it has.

There are a handful of original consultants teaching Six Sigma from the early Motorola days. Would you rather have one of these consultants help you certify your organization, or someone who read 4 books on the subject and is knowledgeable of the topics? Ok, you caught me. I oversimplified the subject and there are always exceptions to the rule, but I think you understand my point with respect to the professional instruction. Now let’s look at rigorous application: Would you feel more comfortable with a candidate that improved and controlled a process at GE or one that did the same at a $5 million dollar company? Probably the GE one, because you know that large companies have more rigor around their application and certification processes, and failures at a GE are not as easy to sweep under the carpet. Alright, before someone can jump over to the forum to post hate mail to me, there are exceptions to the rule and I can cite 5 instances that will fail my test also, but in my opinion the general rule holds. After all is said and done, Motorola and GE certifications are pedigrees and company XYZ is not as valuable. Don’t blame me, blame the perceptions of the Quality community. I’m just the bearer of the news.

So, to sum up this question and answer…Can you certify people within your own business? Yes, of course you can. Is it worth much in your company? Probably, if your management team values it and rewards those who attain certification. Is it worth much outside your company? Maybe so, maybe not. It all depends how knowledgeable the person is and how the pedigree is perceived by the interviewing company.

What Are The Legal Implications Of Six Sigma Certification?

Many people like to ask me legal questions about Six Sigma. Here’s what I know:

◉ Motorola has registered and trademarked the phrase “Six Sigma”
◉ Each consulting company owns the copyrights to their own intellectual property and training materials
◉ Certification is in the eyes of the beholder

Given the limited information I know :), here are my pearls of wisdom:

◉ Don’t use the trademarked terms of other companies without their permission
◉ Don’t steal, reprint, or use other people’s copyrighted materials without their written permission
◉ Set and use Six Sigma certification standards that are appropriate for your company

Aside from that, I don’t know of any other issues that would prevent your company from certifying Six Sigma Green Belts, Black Belts or Master Black Belts. If someone knows of any other reasons, post them to the forum.

Can Non-Certified Master Black Belts Mentor Black Belts?

The answer is yes, but let me ask you a question. Would you want a non-certified dentist with years of experience doing your root canal? Or would you want a non-certified mechanic working on your car when you know that most mechanics are certified with biggest certification company in the U.S.? The fact is that both the dentist and the mechanic can probably do the job correctly without certification if they are properly educated, trained and practiced.

But would you want them working in your mouth or on your car? Not me. The fact that some company (outside or inside) has set forth criteria, and that this person has taken and passed a test reassures me (to some degree). We know that not all certifications are equal, but I personally would prefer to be mentored by someone who has learned and used the Six Sigma DMAIC methodology before. Call me old fashioned.

Are There Other Certification Companies Besides Those Listed On iSixSigma?

Every time I visit the Consultants > Six Sigma category of links, I find a new consulting company that has been added to the list. Although the list is very comprehensive and includes all of the big Six Sigma consulting firms, it probably isn’t exhaustive. New consulting companies are formed daily and I’m sure a few of them deal with Six Sigma, and even certify.

So the answer to this question is also Yes. There are other companies that are not listed on iSixSigma that would certify your company and employees. But you should refer back to my previous answer to determine the differences between certifications.

What Are The Requirements For A Consulting Company To Provide Six Sigma Certification?

The answer is none. Any person or persons can form their own consulting company, develop their own materials, and begin training and certifying others. There is no certification body that each consultant must visit to be granted rights to certify. It’s not like ISO 9000 where a registrar might be involved to provide certification of meeting requirements. Caveat emptor – let the buyer beware.

It’s one of the problems of Six Sigma, and also one of the greatest aspects of Six Sigma. You use Six Sigma as your company determines is most appropriate. What…you need to do work to successfully implement Six Sigma in your company (note the sarcasm)? Yes. While the Six Sigma methodology is for the most part standard, Six Sigma deployment catches many people off guard; they’re not used to the lack of structure or rules around deployment within their company. Each company is different: structure, culture, reward systems and size. But if you ask me, it’s the lack of structure that allows each company to maximize their benefit from a customized deployment.

Source: isixsigma.com

Continue reading

Benchmarking Is Not an Option

Over the course of the last year, I have had the privilege to speak with many companies that are either starting or are in the early stages of business transformation. It is astounding how many have not engaged in any form of benchmarking and even more astounding that many never intend to. Most understand the value, but they consider benchmarking to be an optional exercise.

Benchmarking is not optional if you wish to become best in class.

By benchmarking, I am not just referring to collecting market intelligence or the sort of competitive intelligence a marketing team might gather for you. Yes, this is critical. Any business leader who does not understand his competitors’ price point, value proposition and market share is uninformed. This data allows leaders to rank their companies in the market and understand where they can compete effectively and where improvements are needed. These facts and figures do not, however, give them insight as to how these improvements can be made. Process benchmarking fills this gap by providing know-how.

Market intelligence is what mathematicians call “necessary but not sufficient” for creating a competitive advantage. Without this data, you can’t know whether the improvements you make to your products and services are making a significant impact where it counts – in your customers’ market behavior. The data, however, doesn’t help you find the path toward actually making those changes. Process benchmarking helps you change your process by exploring best practices. Without this data, your engineering and business transformation teams will busy themselves relearning what your benchmarking partners have already discovered, slowing your progress and consuming resources unnecessarily. To be truly effective, your benchmarking strategy should include both market and process benchmarks.

Market intelligence can be effectively outsourced. In fact, it can be argued that outsourcing this part of your deployment is more effective than building the capability in house. Adding market benchmarking to your strategy is easy. Process benchmarking, however, is the act of learning best practices and adapting them to fit your products and business strategy. Not only can this not be outsourced easily but if you did outsource this activity, you would essentially giving away your intellectual property. Process benchmarking is a skill all companies that wish to become world-class must master.

Process benchmarking is the art of learning best practices about a particular function, process or application – often from companies in other industries – and translating that learning into knowledge that can be employed to make your use of these functions, processes or applications better. The focus of this exercise is not so much to learn what is best or who is best but rather to learn what is possible. We are hoping to expand our understanding of our processes by examining how others use similar processes to deliver value to their customers. Through process benchmarking, we learn which activities are critical, which strategies work (even when the ones we observe don’t), and where the practical process limits really are. By comparing how we run similar processes in different companies and for different customers, we get something much more valuable than an understanding of what is the best practice. We learn how to make both processes better. We create a new best practice.

Unlike competitive benchmarking which is largely an analytical activity, process benchmarking is a creative activity – it’s an art. As we broaden our understanding of how processes can be employed, even if we ultimately reject the implementation, we increase our understanding of how those processes work. Equipped with this increased knowledge, we are better prepared to innovate. It is these innovations, not the simple adoption of best practices, which give us true competitive advantage.

One of the keys to becoming an industry leader is constant, focused, and deliberate change. True leaders are not waiting for market trends to develop so that they can follow them. Leaders create these trends by driving change in how they service their markets. This constant change means their employees are exposed to and must process new ideas every hour of every day. To lead, you must innovate and to innovate your people must learn to seek out, evaluate and adapt new ideas and perspectives constantly. This is a business culture issue. If you create a culture where it is not just accepted but expected that ideas are sought, processed, and incorporated; your employees will innovate. They will create new approaches to the work they do. Similarly, if you quell this flow of innovation, it will stop. Process benchmarking is a key part of promoting an innovation culture.

So many companies struggle with innovation. They expect to find people who are innately creative and tap into that strength while simultaneously shutting them off from the very stimuli that foster and sustain that creativity. Leaders must not just allow but facilitate the open exchange of knowledge if they want to drive change. Shut down the feed and the creativity dies. Without new knowledge, there can be no focused improvements. Without focused improvements, there can be no growth and what is left is slow decline.

It takes surprisingly little to instill a culture of innovation. You don’t need fancy consultants or a corporate innovation coach. There is no magic pill. You simply need to promote the free sharing of ideas and acknowledge that you must seek ideas from outside your firm to perpetuate that free sharing. When we “own” our corporate know-how we risk that know-how becoming obsolete and irrelevant.

So, is benchmarking optional? Well, to the extent that you are not interested in long-term profitability, sure. If you are content to have your market share eroded by those who execute better, who innovate more, and who understand their processes better than you do, then by all means do not send your people out to learn from others. If, on the other hand, you hope to grow and survive, learn to benchmark. Grab market intelligence wherever and whenever possible – it’s worth the price. Go see how others run their businesses and show them how you run yours – it’s worth the risk. Innovate, compete, and succeed. More is gained by being a full partner in your industry and a lone player with lots of secrets.

Continue reading

Using Lean to Trim Stat Turnaround Time in Hospital Lab

During the last five years, Ephrata Community Hospital in Ephrata, Pennsylvania, USA, has seen laboratory volumes increase by 13.5 percent annually. That resulted in the hospital expanding its lab into a new facility in 2004. Yet despite the new facility, a big challenge remained – meeting the goal of a 60-minute turnaround time for all stat labs. This was one of the main reasons the lab management team chose to learn to use the Lean methodology to improve its lab processes.

Current State Mapping Using Lean Tools

The project team started by going to the “gemba” or “place of work” to find out what really went on from the view of a lab sample. This was done by following a lab sample through the normal, uninterrupted process in the lab. This was done for a few “stat” and “floor” labs. The observations were then used to create a value stream map, spaghetti map, time-value analysis and a Takt time analysis of the lab turnaround process.

Figure 1: Value Stream Map of Lab

Figure 2: Takt Time Analysis in ED

Introduction to Lean Concepts

The hospital’s lab team then convened for a couple of lively didactic learning sessions to understand the basics of Lean. Consultants first discussed the concepts of value-added steps and non-value-added steps and the team members offered up many examples of waste in their labs. As the team worked through some more advanced Lean concepts, it started to get a picture of the power of Lean. Team members then participated in an interactive exercise to pilot these Lean concepts in a mock mini-Kaizen event. There were many “ah-ha” moments in the exercise as the team learned to break apart processes and reduce waste. At this point, team members unanimously agreed that Lean was something they could use to make positive changes in the lab. Now it was time to really see what was going on in the lab using the Lean tools.

Examining the Current-State Maps

Armed with a new understanding of how Lean searches for and eliminates waste in processes, the team examined the current-state maps that had been created.

This exercise helped participants to correctly see the lab processes. For those members of the team who worked outside of the lab, this clarified the operations in the lab. More importantly, for those who worked in the lab (who would eventually own the process changes), this helped them to see the entirety of the lab processes. They were seeing the processes in an objective way that was outside of their own particular role. The entire team acquired a common language and decision criteria to move forward to make positive changes in the lab using Lean.

Conducting the Mini-Kaizen Event

Eight team members – technicians, managers, phlebotomists and secretarial staff – participated in the mini-Kaizen event. In addition, two consultants provided Lean and facilitation expertise. The director of labs and the chief pathologist acted as co-sponsors.

Day 1: The team started by doing a reality check and clarifying the goal statement for the mini-Kaizen. This identified that the two most important goals for the session were to “work on reducing stat turnaround time (TAT)” and to “eliminate waste in the phlebotomist and specimen processing areas.” The team agreed that its actions would be directed by this goal statement but not limited by it. Any positive changes the team could accomplish in the labs would not be off limits.

To get a jump-start on try-storming, team members brainstormed and prioritized 21 unique ideas that were categorized into three groups – “just do it,” “try-storm” and “hold for later.” The ideas are listed below. Figure 3 shows how they were ranked and evaluated.

Figure 3: Ideas of Team Members Ranked and Evaluated

List of Ideas:

1. Order placed in ER at time of draw

2. Install specimen label printer in ED

3. ED physician education around CPG’s

4. Phleb. place order on verbal ok (no verbal orders allowed)

5. Second shift lab tech in ER

6. ED collect all labs (nurse draws)

7. Classification in ED of who is actually doing draw of patient

8. Lab person carry stat beeper 24/7 instead of calling labs

9. Tube system

10. ER labs runner

11. Stat lab

12. Designated area in lab for stats (prototype for stat lab)

13. Centrifuge in ER

14. Spin any labs holding for orders

15. Full-time designated person in specimen processing area

16. Separate clincial and anatomical specimen processing

17. Have a visual sign “stats spinning”

18. Put alarm on last centrifuge

19. Reorganize secretary and phlebotomist area

20. Do not batch labs to spin

21. ED follow EML

The team had four ideas related to stat labs from the emergency department (ED) that were relatively easy to implement and that it wanted to attack first. The team implemented these ideas. A key learning took place at this point…the importance of communication. Although steps had been taken to communicate potential changes in the Kaizen, the ED team members were somewhat reluctant to adopt the changes and half-heartedly accepted. The team learned a lesson and moved on.

Because the other ideas, related to changes in the phlebotomist and specimen processing areas, were more complicated (and temporarily disruptive), the team spent the rest of the day coming up with detailed plans about how it would try-storm the ideas the next day, including what supplies would be needed and how they would communicate.

Day 2: The team went to work try-storming its ideas for the phlebotomist and specimen processing areas, which included implementing some visual controls and a physical swap of the phlebotomist and secretarial work areas in the lab. That idea would clear up the main traffic bottleneck in the lab and reduce distance traveled. Based on the lesson learned about the importance of communication, the team brought in the management team to oversee moving the area since it created a lot of temporary turmoil.

The team spent some time determining its follow-up plan for the ED fixes, which it realized would take a more planned-out rollout and communication plan to leverage a buy-in from the ED management. For all the fixes that were done in the mini-Kaizen, the team discussed possible measurement (control) plans, communication plans and next-steps plans.

Kaizen Results: What Was Accomplished

The Kaizen team did an estimate of the expected benefits as outlined in the table below:

Summary of Expected Benefits

Hard Benefits

Phlebotomist/Secretary Move

Phlep./tech walk distance – 4,000 feet saved per day

Phleb./tech motion – Reduce TAT 1 minute per sample

ED Communciations Changes

Centrifuge stat visual control – Reduce TAT 5 minutes per ED sample

ED runner – Reduce TAT 1 minute per ED sample

ED add-on fax – Reduce TAT 1 minute per ED sample

Clarify who draws test – Reduce TAT 5 seconds per ED sample

Soft Benefits

Standardized some processes

Addressed some compliance/regulatory issues

The 4,000 feet of walking distance saved led to an actual reduction of more than 265 miles of lab staff walking per year.

After time and data collection, statistical testing proved a three-minute reduction in median stat lab turnaround time, from 45 minutes to 42 minutes (across all three shifts). Statistical testing also showed statistically significant reductions in the median defect number (TAT greater than 60 minutes) for the a.m., the p.m. and the midnight shifts.

Continue reading

Three Lean Tools for Agile Development Environments

Agile software development delivers quick business value and at the same time remains flexible to the core, as opposed to its traditional alternative, the waterfall model. Agile involves unconventional, bottom-up, entrepreneurial and locally optimized project groups empowered to make decisions that are the best fit for individual projects. For greater design effectiveness, complexity control and efficient task scheduling in these environments, practitioners benefit from being familiar with three Lean Six Sigma tools: the quality function deployment, the design structure matrix and the visual control board.

An Agile Challenge

Agile, a complex and dynamic environment, specifically gives rise to three primary concerns, as compared to conventional projects:

1. The ability to stay focused on business or customer value and not the product or processes, while aligning and transforming customer needs to software and projects.

2. The little time available within each iteration to complete a complex requirements dependency map and schedule use case.

3. Micromanaging daily or hourly assigned tasks in every cycle of iteration, with little room for slippage and risk mitigation.

Tools Provide the Solution

What best fits this culture of non-IT firms is simple tool-based value creation or productivity improvement, rather than complying with a set of processes. To approach resolving the agile-specific challenges , here are the three effective tools picked up from an agile project manager’s tool kit for unconventional environments:

◉ Quality function deployment – This relates to the first principle of Lean thinking: identifying the customer and the customer’s value. It aids in aligning and transforming customer needs to design or codes.

◉ Design structure matrix – Value stream mapping every activity of customer value and eliminating waste from processes is the next principle of Lean. This tool aids in the pre-design dependency mapping and complexity management.

◉ Visual control board – Flow and pull, eliminating all information or material-flow bottlenecks and allowing critical information to flow upstream, is the next Lean maturity level. This board allows practitioners to micromanage daily and hourly tasks with improved visibility and teamwork.

Quality Function Deployment

In software development, a quality function deployment (QFD) works through four stages of transformation. Each stage is called a house of quality. This is the transformation flow from “customer wants” to “product specifications”:

1. Product house of quality involves translating what the customer wants, described in their language, into a list of prioritized product or service design requirements in the company’s language which describes how the product works. It also compares the company’s performance with its competitors, and sets targets for improvement to differentiate their products from competitor products or services.

2. Part design house of quality translates product specifications (the design criteria from Step 1) into part characteristics. Some sample part characteristics are number of simple object access protocol (SOAP) services, Java classes and input/output performance requirements.

3. Development process house of quality translates and aligns part characteristics (from Step 2) into optimal process characteristics, such as automation, compilers and web servers, that maximize the ability to deliver the best quality product as expected by the customers.

4. Project management house of quality translates process characteristics into project delivery or project management methods that will optimize an organization’s ability to deliver the best quality in the most efficient manner. These methods include waterfall, agile, the scrum tool set and risk management.

Figure 1: Standard Quality Function Deployment House of Quality Components

Benefits of Using Quality Function Deployment

Benefit 1: QFD enables flexible IT projects to remain directly aligned to voice of the customer (VOC) and allows for a flawless transformation of VOC into design parameters and project parameters. Continuous prioritization of customer requirements enables organizations to focus on the development items and activities that are linked to the highest customer value through relative ranking and weighting of requirements.

Benefit 2: Interdependency and correlation between requirements at every house (the top triangular section in Figure 1) and critical design decisions can be taken easily and quickly using QFD.

Benefit 3: On the same QFD worksheet at every house, it is possible not only to compare requirements and design features with standards and internal targets, but also to benchmark project values with those of the best in the market or those of competitors.

Design Structure Matrix

A design structure matrix (DSM) provides a simple, compact and visual representation of a complex system that supports innovative solutions to decomposition and integration problems. The advantages of DSMs in alternative system representation and analysis techniques have led to their increasing use in a variety of contexts, including product development, project planning and project management. There are four DSM applications:

1. Component-based, or architecture, which is useful for modeling system component relationships and facilitating appropriate architectural decomposition strategies

2. Team-based, or organization, which is beneficial for designing integrated organization structures that account for team interactions

3. Activity-based, or schedule, which is advantageous for modeling the information flow among process activities

4. Parameter-based, or low-level schedule, which is effective for integrating low-level design processes based on physical design parameter relationships

In a nutshell, DSM is a complexity management pre-design tool. Using it requires completing an initial base step, and then following one of two management steps:

Drawing the base DSM – This process begins with building a given requirements dependency map, sometimes called a spaghetti graph (Figure 2). Any project task, product design or requirement elements can be represented in this graph, which clearly depicts the inter-relationships between the items, known as the complexity of the engagement. Arrows represent flow of information and its direction. This diagram shows the total complexity of the engagement and sets up the basis for drawing the DSM. In Figure 2, all information flows out of B, hence B is a pure driver item. Element I, however, is only influenced by other elements; therefore, it is a perfectly dependent item.

Figure 2: Given Requirements Dependency Map

Next, it is possible to convert the elements of the spaghetti graph into a base DSM (Figure 3). The work items (as per the initial sequence) are listed across the X and Y axes, and dots are used to represent dependency. For example, A depends on C, but A has been scheduled before C, which is not feasible. Any dots above the diagonal line are not feasible or preferred. Hence, the objective is to minimize those downstream dependencies.

Figure 3: Base Design Structure Matrix

DSM Partitioning – The base DSM provides the initial sequence of the customer’s requirements. But the requirement items and features A to L must still be shuffled to minimize dependency above the diagonal line. After being re-sequenced, the dependency dots will come closer to the diagonal line, and then it is possible to start partitioning the DSM. Although practitioners cannot proceed in a sequenced manner with dots above the diagonal line, they may partition the whole DSM into square boxes. This allows them to see a group of dots as single item or as a small project with parallel or coupled work streams (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Partitioned Base Design Structure Matrix

DSM Banding –This is an alternative to DSM partitioning. Based on the product complexity, team structure, location, available time and other parameters, practitioners may choose one of these two operations. DSM banding is used for segmenting the activity flow into various parallel or concurrent bands or levels. Each band consists of grouping activities or development items into sequences that are not dependent on each other for information (Figure 5). In this DSM, white and yellow bands are independent items, which construct the critical path of the project. For example, items 7 and 8 do not wait for each other to receive the information flow, and therefore they are on the same band. The lesser the number of bands, the less concurrency and complexity there is in the project.

Figure 5: Banded Design Structure Matrix

Benefits of Using Design Structure Matrix

Benefit 1: DSM simplifies a project’s complexity and enables visible profiling of interdependencies and information flow.

Benefit 2: DSM – partitioning or banding – makes it easy to decide the number of iteration cycles based on the critical path, as well as the items that should go into each cycle.

Benefit 3: DSM transforms an apparently sequential design with hidden dependency and a complex flow of steps or information into a concurrent, independent, manageable set of items, requirements or design elements.

Visual Control Board

A visual control board is a highly effective but less practiced tool for ground level project tracking and scheduling. It is recommended for an iterative software or product development environment, because it is dynamic and flexible with business demands.

Table 1 is a simple example of a visual control board for a hypothetical team of five people developing a complex software solution. It is a simple task-entry mechanism against each team member on the calendar. Each box represents the task element (E) and the percentage of target completion on that calendar date. The last entry represents the percentage of actual completion by the end of the day. As the name suggests, it is not a document; it is drawn on a visual board in the middle of an office so that every stakeholder may visit it at any time for the latest status, performance comparison, re-scheduling needs, target reset needs and other utilities.

Table 1: Sample Visual Control Boar

Team Member	Aug. 6, 2007	Aug. 7, 2007	Aug. 8, 2007	Aug. 9, 2007
John	E1 – 20 percent – 10 percent	E1 – 20 percent – 10 percent	E1 – 20 percent –	E1 – 20 percent –
Martin	E2 – 50 percent – 40 percent	E2 – 50 percent – 40 percent	E2 – 100 percent –	E2 – 100 percent –
Simon	E3 – 80 percent – 100 percent	E1 – 20 percent – 20 percent	E3 – 80 percent –	E3 – 80 percent –
Kevin	E4 – 40 percent – 50 percent	E4 – 40 percent – 50 percent	E8 – 10 percent –	E8 – 30 percent –
Jean	E5 – 100 percent – 40 percent	E5 – 60 percent – 60 percent	E7 – 20 percent –	E7 – 20 percent

The actual percentages are put in by the team members, which makes them even more responsible. To understand the power of a visual control board, take the case of Simon, who was given a target of completing 80 percent of E3 on Aug. 6. He actually finished all of E3 on that day, whereas John could not meet his target for E1 on Aug. 6. Hence, with a visual control board, it is a simple decision to assign E1 to Simon on Aug. 7 alongside John. This way the team may remain on schedule on that task element despite John’s slow progress on the previous day.

Benefits of Visual Control Board

Benefit 1: Allows for visible progress tracking and resetting targets as per an individual performance trend.

Benefit 2: Creates a competitive and empowered environment in the workplace, with quick decision making and team collaboration.

Benefit 3: For a sizeable team with many independent development and design task items and elements and a short release cycle, the visual control board is the best fit. It enables team members to set and review daily targets. It also helps with continuous productivity growth and leverages that growth to beat constraints, risks and delays in order to meet schedule commitments.

Tool Set for Quick Reference

The information in Table 2 provides a quick summary of the practitioners who will find these tools most valuable.

Table 2: Agile Tool Set Audience and Applicability

Tool	Audience	Applicability
Quality function deployment	Development team, business analysts, design leads	High-level or ambiguous business needs Considerable amount of functional and non functional reuqirements Too may critical design parameters System designed from scratch
Design structure matrix	Development team, IT systems consultants and managers, architects or re-engineering teams	Too much interdependency between design elements or project tasks Changing an existing complex software application or product Large project assignment given to relatively new team members
Visual control board	Development teams, scrum masters, agile project leads	Large team with granular task items and short release cycle Scrum or agile projects with a sizeable team (more than five members) Little room for slippage for market critical release

Applying the Toolset Benefits

This is a too set for improved design effectiveness, complexity control and efficient task scheduling in agile development environments. The quality function deployment, design structure matrix and visual control board each have their own strengths, and knowing the benefits of all three will allow practitioners to use the right tool in the right situation.

Continue reading

How to Become a Lean Six Sigma Organization

In a difficult economy, an increasing number of senior business leaders are seeking to boost the performance of their operations by adopting Lean Six Sigma. Before these organizations can begin to reap the benefits of continuous process improvement, they must first understand the fundamental elements of the process known as DMAIC (for Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control).

One of the best ways to roll out a Lean Six Sigma program is to treat the process as a Six Sigma process in and of itself. The following are some basic guidelines, arranged in the classic five-stage DMAIC process, for organizations that are interested in adopting Lean Six Sigma.

Define

As soon as corporate leadership indicates that the organization will adopt Six Sigma, it is imperative that all senior leaders become familiar with Six Sigma concepts and what being a Six Sigma organization actually means. Strong and visible support from the top is critical to the success of the program and continued organizational change.

Senior management must go through a leadership training course that outlines the basics of the DMAIC process, Lean Six Sigma management and other types of training available, such as Design for Six Sigma (DFSS). This training should include specific examples of success, typical timetables for deployment and a set of measurable goals. Lean Six Sigma Champions need to be identified, trained and given clear expectations about how they will contribute to the deployment. Financial representatives also need to undergo this training as they will be required to validate actual and projected financial benefits from the very early stages of the roll-out.

Measure

In order to gauge the impacts of processes on an organization’s productivity, progress must be measured as the program is rolled out. The key performance indicators (KPIs) for the program should, at minimum, include the following elements:

1. The number of Black Belts (BB) and Green Belts (GB) who need to be trained, as well as experts in Lean and DFSS
2. Dollar-target benefits

These elements also need to be tied in with individual (performance) goals to ensure success.

Training to the next level – All leaders (middle management and above) need to take awareness training for Lean Six Sigma, which takes approximately fours hours and includes basic Six Sigma and Lean principles. This training is essential to ensure that team members understand the key concepts and view Lean Six Sigma as a resource that can help them achieve their objectives, rather than being an outside interference.

As the organization’s leaders go through their leadership or awareness training, a targeted number of Belt trainees should be determined for the first year. A typical approach would be to have a “first wave” of Green Belt training in the organization. As the trained Green Belts return to work in their own roles, it is often beneficial for them to take on a Green Belt project that is closely aligned with their job objectives.

In the beginning, at least, the best-performing employees should be selected for the Green Belt program to ensure a higher probability of success. Line managers also need to be involved in the selection process to ensure their continued support. Success in these early stages can go a long way toward demonstrating the benefits of Lean Six Sigma to the entire organization and encouraging buy-in. Champions and senior management must give the program high visibility to ensure that the employees understand Six Sigma as the normal “way of business.”

Project Selection – When DMAIC is first rolled out in an organization, there are normally discussions about what is and what isn’t a Lean Six Sigma project. During this time, leaders should remember the whole point of the process: To improve organizational performance through use of the Lean Six Sigma tools, not the other way around.

A key point in the identification of worthy projects is the use of data to demonstrate that there is an opportunity and that the perceived benefits are not based on hearsay or “gut feelings.” It cannot be emphasised enough that a substantial investment in the early stages of project definition must be made to ensure success. Most project failures are due to poorly defined projects that could have been avoided if adequate preparatory work had been conducted.

In the beginning of project selection, the Champion must also be proactive in team-member identification, as well as the removal of any barriers that may prevent team formation. Typically the core team should consist of three to six members, who should include, at minimum, a process owner, a subject matter expert and a process operator. Someone working close to the process must also be included in the team, as that person will likely have a deeper understanding of the day to day operation and ensure operator buy-in.

Extended team members should include a financial representative, who does not need to attend all the meetings but who should have a full understanding of all project developments. The Champion should be present for the first team meeting, when the project scope is reviewed and agreed upon by all team members. In all matters, the VOC, whether it is internal or external, must be the driving force for any project definition.

Analyze

Typically, a Six Sigma DMAIC project may take between three and five months to complete, but this can vary enormously depending upon the urgency and the project scope. A Kaizen event, for example, may take only three to five days, while a more complex project could take up to a year. A basic rule, often overlooked, is that clear agendas must be sent out by Belts or project leaders well in advance of the meetings in order to aid preparation. Minutes with clear action owners and timescales also must be distributed as soon as possible after each meeting.

Once the initial wave of Green Belts has started their projects, a Champion review process should be put in place. Typically this should happen once per month, where all the GBs come together with the Champion to review the scope, financial benefits, barriers and progress with specific actions. This will ensure that progress can be measured and demonstrated according to the key deliverables in the DMAIC process. Occasionally, business conditions can change, and the Champion should not be shy to pull the plug on a particular project if it is clear that no financial benefits will be gained, or if a greater opportunity for improvement is found elsewhere.

Depending on how the organization wants to develop its Lean Six Sigma program, business leaders may want to consider which, if any, of the GB candidates could become Black Belt candidates. BBs will gain more in-depth Lean Six Sigma training and will work 100 percent on the program’s roll-out by leading more complex projects than the GBs; typically, BB projects are worth more than $100,000 in savings for the organization. BBs can also mentor other Belts and help Champions and business leaders identify future projects.

As the Belts start to become more familiar with Lean Six Sigma during their projects, it will become easier for them to understand how the tools can be better employed and to identify ways in which business performance can be improved.

At this point, a fixed, robust project identification process should be in place. This should entail a meeting that normally takes place on a monthly basis and is chaired by a BB. The attendees should consist of process owners, business leaders (where possible) and operators from all areas of the business. Depending on the complexity of the organization, this may be broken down by division or business area. The meeting attendees also should change from time to time to freshen up the flow of new ideas.

The Champions, process owners and business leaders should each have specific targets for the number of ideas to be generated, according to business function or division. This type of meeting would normally take the form a brainstorming exercise, where the team (using a fishbone diagram) would identify potential improvement areas.

The group would then prioritize these ideas and assign specific actions during the meeting. These actions would normally entail data collection, where an individual would have the task of locating the correct data in order to validate or reject a perceived opportunity. As the meetings progress and become part of the culture, there should be a pipeline of ideas being worked on at any given time. The end result should be a “bucket of opportunities” that the business leaders can select from, according to the business needs. These would then be resourced accordingly.

Improve

All Belts must go through a certification process after satisfying certain clearly defined criteria (i.e., achieving a certain amount of savings, demonstrating usage of certain tools or presenting project benefits to the business leaders). At this stage, the business will start to see the benefits of the initial Six Sigma projects.

The certification process and the project successes need to be highly visible in the organization so that all associates can see that Lean Six Sigma is the way the company will be approaching business in the future. Part of this visibility can be achieved by an appropriate celebration and recognition of project successes by senior management.

Once this level is reached, the Lean Six Sigma training program needs to be spread throughout the organization. Management should consider enlisting all associates for awareness training. The high-profile successes will also generate a greater interest from other associates in attending training sessions.

Control

As the company continues to move toward becoming a full-fledged Six Sigma operation, the following events must be fixed in the organization’s monthly calendar:

◉ Monthly project review meetings – Attendees: Belts, Champions and business leaders.

◉ Project identification meetings – Attendees: Process owners, Champions, process operators and Belts.

◉ Validation of savings – Belts need to have savings validated by the finance rep.

The KPIs for this process need to be clear to all associates in the organization. These should include the following and should be part of the senior management review process:

◉ Lean Six Sigma training plan versus target, continuously updated according to business needs

◉ Certification plan versus target

◉ Number of Belts with assigned projects (resource utilization)

◉ Savings versus target, including a required monthly financial report.

◉ Number of prioritized ready-to-assign projects versus target

Final Steps

When all of the above processes are in place, the organization will be well on the road to becoming a Lean Six Sigma company, where Six Sigma tools are utilized for everyday activities at every level.

The above requires a huge effort from senior management, at least in the early stages. There is a need to have a high level of discipline within the organization to ensure that the above meetings take place with the expectation that those assigned actions will deliver in a timely manner.

Initially, some resistors could perceive Lean Six Sigma as additional and unnecessary work. But as projects progress, with the required level of support, employees will see that the process simply helps them perform their roles in a far more effective manner, giving them greater potential for personal development and ensuring that their organization remains competitive.

Continue reading

What Process Improvement Can Learn From Soccer

Billions of people across the globe were bitten by soccer fever in 2014. It’s a sport that is widely followed and has the highest level of thrill. The other day I was watching a repeat telecast of the Brazil vs Chile match. It was an exciting match that went into extra time and then eventually it was up to a penalty shootout to decide the winner. The post-match comments were interesting and made me realize the seven things that process improvement can learn from soccer.

1. Play with a team and not with players. Like in soccer, all process improvements are done with a team. It is critical that a process improvement team, like a soccer team, should have one goal – to win. Your process improvement team might have a couple of great players, but the success of a project depends on how you are focusing on the skills of each player rather than just depending on a couple of great players to bring about that improvement.

2. Have a strategy. We have heard of 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations of a soccer team. These are strategies that are made in the dressing room and are practiced multiple times before the actual match. A process improvement manager should ensure that there a strategy to improvement. Roles and responsibilities of each member needs to be clearly defined before you start the project. It cannot be take-as-it-comes. A poor strategy will often decide the fate of a project.

3. Play to your strengths. There are teams who are great in defending and there are others who are great at attacking. Some teams will goal with free kicks, while others go for corners or set pieces. Often the strategy is built around your strengths. In process improvement it is also advisable to identify your team’s strengths. You do not want to suggest a technology intervention or innovation for improvement unless your team has the capability to bring the change or the organization is willing to spend. Remember, even small interventions can bring improvement.

4. Revisit strategy. There are times when things do not go according to plan. It is important to revisit your strategy. The advantage process improvement has over soccer is that you need not wait for half time. As soon as you identify that things are not moving as per the plan, it’s time to revisit the strategy.

5. Avoid yellow and red cards. When you initiate a project you are surrounded by many people who would not want change in their processes. They will question your strategy, your target, improvement recommendations and everything else that they can. As a project manager, you need to find a way out to work around them rather than work through them. Remember your Champion is like a referee and he has to be on both sides. Do not give him a chance to pull you down, especially when you are playing in their half.

6. Do not play for a draw. The difference between a great team and a good team is that great teams never play for a draw, even if they know that a draw will sail them through to the next round. In process improvement, you should never settle for less, even if you know that less will ensure that your project is closed. There is always a chance that your stakeholder will realize that there is more opportunity to improve and she will ask you to revisit your target when you are looking for the final sign off. This can demotivate the team and also puts a question mark on the ability of the project leader.

7. Don’t leave it for penalty shootout. You should never leave the result for the last. There should be enough tollgate reviews and rigorous pilot testing to give you confidence that you will succeed. When you reach a penalty shoot-out stage, the probability to win becomes 50 percent, no matter how good a team you have.

Continue reading