2001 A SUPER methodology for business process improvement An industrial case study

Article information:

To cite this document: K.T. LeeK.B. Chuah, (2001),"A SUPER methodology for business process improvement - An industrial case study in Hong Kong/China", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 Iss 5/6 pp. 687 - 706 Permanent link t o t his document : http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570110390408

Downloaded on: 19 March 2017, At : 20: 21 (PT) Ref erences: t his document cont ains ref erences t o 14 ot her document s. To copy t his document : permissions@emeraldinsight . com The f ullt ext of t his document has been downloaded 2683 t imes since 2006*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:

(2005),"Developing and evaluating a methodology for business process improvement", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 11 Iss 1 pp. 37-46 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637150510578719

(2011),"A structured evaluation of business process improvement approaches", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 17 Iss 2 pp. 203-237 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637151111122329

Access t o t his document was grant ed t hrough an Emerald subscript ion provided by emerald-srm: 602779 [ ]

For Authors

If you would like t o writ e f or t his, or any ot her Emerald publicat ion, t hen please use our Emerald f or Aut hors service inf ormat ion about how t o choose which publicat ion t o writ e f or and submission guidelines are available f or all. Please visit www. emeraldinsight . com/ aut hors f or more inf ormat ion.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com

Emerald is a global publisher linking research and pract ice t o t he benef it of societ y. The company manages a port f olio of more t han 290 j ournals and over 2, 350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an ext ensive range of online product s and addit ional cust omer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Relat ed cont ent and download inf ormat ion correct at t ime of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft

A SUPER methodology for A SUPER

methodology for

business process improvement BPI

An industrial case study in

Hong Kong/China

K.T. Lee and K.B. Chuah

City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Keywords BPR, Continuous improvement, Benchmarking, Performance measurement, Methodology, Case study

Abstract In recent years, three key topics under the big umbrella of business process improvement (BPI) have been continuous process improvement (CPI), business process reengineering (BPR), and business process benchmarking (BPB). Each has received much attention and has been supported by a considerable amount of literature and empirical research and findings from business consultants and academics. Within the manufacturing domain, these three topics have been accepted by many manufacturing process analysts striving to improve productivity and efficiency of companies. However, organization structures in manufacturing enterprises are complex and involve many different processes. Their needs may be quite different. One process may require an incremental improvement in critical areas or technology updating in its existing operation while others may need a total enterprise-wide process revamp. In other words, CPI, BPR, and BPB's usefulness and applicability may not be universal; one or a combination of the two or three may be more appropriate, depending on the process, organization and its environment. An improvement framework which incorporates the characteristics of the three approaches has been developed. This paper describes the methodology, SUPER, and its use in a real case study.

1. Introduction Today, organizations worldwide have to cope with very keen competition and a dynamic environment as market conditions are changing rapidly while customers are demanding better and better products and services. In response to the increasingly stringent demands and to maintain the competitive

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

advantage, consistently high quality products and services are needed to be designed, produced, promoted and distributed at a competitive cost to capture or secure market share (AQCL, 1997). An organization's business goals and strategies may have to be modified and targeted to raise the four performance standards, namely, conformance to standards, fitness for purpose, process cycle time, and process cost (US Department of Defense, 1994) to match the changing customers' needs and market conditions. In fact, many companies

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Mr Dicky Tong, the Director in Business Development Section of Moulin International Holdings Limited, for his participation in this exercise. They also wish to thank Mr Frankie Lau, the Assistant Manager in Operation Support Department of Bold Ware (Optical) Manufactory Limited as well as the team leader in the BPI International Journal of Operations &

project, for his kind support and helpful guidance towards accomplishing the study. Thanks are

Production Management,

also extended to the people in the PIT for their help and assistance during the study. Vol. 21 No. 5/6, 2001, pp. 687-706.

# MCB University Press, 0144-3577

IJOPM

nowadays have come to realize the importance of constantly strengthening and

improving themselves to win or survive in the global competitive market. However, such high level of customer orientation which results in fast and reliable delivery of high quality products or product-innovation no longer ensures competitive advantage (Mertins et al., 1996). Researchers like Hiatt (1996) are well aware that improving business processes is also paramount for

businesses to stay competitive in today's marketplace. The traditional view of quality and performance has been reassessed (e.g. Cook, 1996; Zairi, 1997) and business process improvement (BPI) is introduced to provide an effective and comprehensive means to improve a company's performance (Flanigan and Scott, 1995; Zairi, 1997; Tenner and DeToro, 1997).

BPI is simply a method of improving the way a discrete set of business activities is organized and managed (Cook, 1996). It is a structured approach to analyze and continually improve fundamental activities of a company's operation by simplifying and streamlining business processes. BPI will lead to the efficient and effective use of resources such as facilities, people, equipment, time and capital (Zairi, 1997). Harrington (1995) further elaborates that making processes more effective means producing the desired results from product or service in comparison to what the customers required; while making processes more efficient means minimizing the resources used such as costs, materials, cycle time, and so on from the internal process operation; and making processes adaptable means being able to meet changing customer and business needs.

Under the big umbrella of BPI, three aspects of process improvement strategies and activities commonly being adopted by today's organizations are continuous process improvement (CPI), business process reengineering (BPR), and business process benchmarking (BPB). They have their own specific purposes and have different impacts and effects on the organization. As Caudle (1995) explains, process improvement can include continuous business process improvement that incrementally improves the operation efficiency, or total reengineering from a clean sheet to achieve maximum effectiveness during a short timeframe. Today, organizational structures of most manufacturing

companies are so complex and usually involve many different processes. Their needs to improve in performance may be universal. However, how improvement can be achieved may be very different for different companies. Some processes may only need incremental improvement in critical areas while others may require a sudden change or total revamp through process reengineering, or some may even need a combination of both (Caudle, 1995). In order to ensure selection of the appropriate improvement strategy or approach, much time and effort is needed to understand the underlying concept, methodology and impact of each approach. The literature does not seem to show any easy way up the learning curve in BPI.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

This paper proposes a methodology called SUPER that enables a company to achieve significant improvements in the operations of the company. Besides CPI and BPR as propounded by Caudle (1995), benchmarking is the third key element in SUPER. Combining these three elements, a new five-phase SUPER This paper proposes a methodology called SUPER that enables a company to achieve significant improvements in the operations of the company. Besides CPI and BPR as propounded by Caudle (1995), benchmarking is the third key element in SUPER. Combining these three elements, a new five-phase SUPER

A SUPER concept of the proposed SUPER methodology, then an industrial case study is methodology for described to illustrate its application and usefulness.

BPI

2. The five phases of SUPER methodology SUPER is an acronym for:

(1) select the process;

(2) understand the process; (3) proceed with the process measurement; (4) execute the process improvement; and (5) review the improved process.

Basically, the SUPER methodology is a five-phase BPI framework used to tackle the improvement problems which arise in an organization. It serves as a road map to move a process from its current state along a guided path to better, even world-class, performance.

SUPER is developed with the Hong Kong/China industrial environment in mind. In Hong Kong, over 90 percent of enterprises are small companies which are established by the cooperation of two or three practitioners. In order to

reduce the operation cost, part of the labor-intensive manufacturing processes of those companies have been transferred to China but still maintain the

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Figure 1. SUPER model (layer 1)

IJOPM

headquarters in Hong Kong (Lee and Ho, 1997). Such businesses have been

developing rapidly in the last two decades. The fast pace of industrialization highlights the need of an effective and flexible improvement approach to tackle the variety of problems generated every day. Unfortunately, the organization's structures are very complicated in that a tremendous amount of processes may

be involved in one unit sector. Sometimes, it is hard to determine what sort of

improvement route should be adopted when a quick response to the business problem is required. The current approaches of BPR, CPI, or BPB are capable of dealing with most business problems, but for some specific processes, extra time may need to be taken for re-adjusting these methodologies for the specific processes. That would certainly prolong the response time of the problem.

SUPER is a three-in-one approach which integrates the key activities of the three individual improvement methodologies and is particularly appropriate for the fast rhythm of Hong Kong/China industries. By using SUPER, it can satisfy three types of requirements with reengineering, continuous improvement, and benchmarking from various business processes and the time of selecting the improvement strategy is saved.

Furthermore, most of the businessmen in Hong Kong/China do not have an in-depth knowledge and skills in analyzing and managing the business process. They carry out the improvement project usually depending on their past working experience. SUPER is a simple and logical improvement guideline established based on 15 key steps. It can be carried out as an individual methodology. For industrialists and managers who are unfamiliar with the improvement route but are striving to improve the performance of the organization, they can use this approach as a guide to achieve targeted results. For each phase, there are some key activities involved. The rest of this section gives a brief description of SUPER. Figure 2 expands the second layer of the generic model of SUPER in the form of a process flow chart. The following sub-sections outline the steps/activities in each of SUPER's five phases.

2.1 Phase one: select the process

The purpose of this phase is to investigate and select the problematic processes that are critical to and essential for meeting customers' requirements and enhancing the company's competitive position in the industry. There are four activities in this phase (Steps 1 to 4 of Figure 2).

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Selecting the right process or processes to be changed will act as a target to pinpoint the direction of the improvement program. The process improvement team (PIT) is a group selected by the top management to take the responsibility of the whole improvement program. The PIT's delegated authority and responsibility from the top management should be clear and visible to show the company's commitment to change. Hiatt (1996) thinks a well-rounded team should include a mix of people and skills. The team may need the people who understand and actively use the current processes, but those who work closely with customers (internal or external) may also be important for the project as the customer requirements can easily be obtained. Other technical experts and

A SUPER methodology for BPI

Figure 2. SUPER model (layer 2)

the individuals who are directly involved in or unfamiliar with the processes may also join in the PIT to provide fresh or new perspectives.

Team size is another factor noted by Hiatt (1996). He states the best size is between the range of 3-12 members. Although a larger team would bring more

different business perspectives to the team, the decision processes would be slow and costly while the smaller team works faster and produces results more quickly.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

The team's first task is to identify and prioritize the final value-added output(s) of the company itself. This is a logical lead to the next steps to identify the end customers who receive the final output(s), and to get the end customers' requirements and opinions about the output. The PIT then uses this

information for the next step: process identification and selection (Step 4). A simple method of identifying processes in need of improvement is to hold a brainstorming session for compiling a list of processes which:

cause most complaints to external/internal customers;

cause most errors;

take most time to complete;

IJOPM

involve most people;

involve duplication of effort; or

incur most costs. Then the team can come to agree on which processes are the most important to

be reviewed.

2.2 Phase two: understand the process In this phase, the PIT is going to study the process architecture/flow and understand the operating activities involved in the selected processes. This process analysis should include the tasks and sub-tasks, so that the PIT can make effective changes to the processes. The main activity in this phase is to identify and clearly map out the process tasks and sub-tasks (Step 5 of Figure 2) and their important inter-relationship.

Problems or process weaknesses may come from a few small tasks within the process. Process mapping is an effective way to chart the process sequence of each task (AS-IS model). However, the PIT need not spend excessive time on the micro level of the process tasks or activities as a clear understanding of the process and the flow with the four objectives below is often enough for the later analysis:

provide the organization with a common understanding of the process;

establish a performance baseline at the process's activity level from which to measure improvement;

identify problem areas and non-value-added activities that need to be changed or eliminated, such as excessive hand-offs, reviews, rework, and queuing time; and

understand exactly what will be changed and who will be affected when moving from the current process to a new process.

2.3 Phase three: proceed with the process measurement

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

The purpose of this phase is to define and measure the operation performance or value of the existing activities or tasks and sub-tasks in the processes, and ultimately illustrate the performance gaps through benchmarking with the predetermined goals of each activity/task or sub-task. There are three activities to be followed (Steps 6 to 8 of Figure 2).

Measurement of performance is important for any improvement program. The company or organization themselves have to realize their current situation or the performance level they are at. Their own performance measure is the baseline data. Based on these data, performance gaps and improvement goals (TO-BE process) can be determined after benchmarking with similar data from

a competitor as industry's best practice.

The problem areas matrix (Chang, 1995) is an effective tool to narrow the scope of the process analysis into the following three categories:

(1) the critical tasks that contain the largest amount of problems (i.e. the

A SUPER

worst task);

methodology for

(2) the critical problems (the current business process with poor

BPI

performance or worst customers complaints) that are involved in the largest amount of tasks; and

(3) the non-value-added tasks (the output value of an activity being lower

than the total cost of the inputs plus the cost of the resources consumed). Type (2) problems are the improvement target of the PIT while (3) problems

can be minimized or directly eliminated. Besides, the measurement will need only to be carried out for (1) problems.

Merely assessing one's own process performance cannot reveal entirely the competitive position of the company in the industry. Benchmarking should be taken to compare the performance levels with others, especially with the competitor's or the best practices in the same industry.

Performance benchmarking contains four main activities: (1) What to benchmark. To determine what sorts of criteria to measure and

compare. These criteria are the basic factors that cause the poor performance of the process.

(2) Who to benchmark. To select the benchmark partners, usually they are those with the best-in-class process performance or some international standards.

(3) Data collection and calculation. To measure the operation data from their own processes as well as those of the benchmark partners. Calculation is needed to transform raw data to meaningful information in the form of some relevant performance index.

(4) Gaps analysis. To compare the data and analyze where and how large the differences are.

Having identified the problem areas and the performance gaps by comparing

with the best practices, the organizations themselves should set the desired state(s) for the measurement criteria adopted. These desired states are the final targets to achieve in the improvement program.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

2.4 Phase four: execute the process improvement This phase seeks to improve the problematic tasks performance to the level of desired states so that the output of the processes can accomplish the level required or expected by the customers, thereby actually increasing the company's competitive position in the industry. There are four activities in this phase (Steps 9 to 12 of Figure 2).

The benchmarking process does not end at goal setting. Actually, it covers the rest of steps and is the core of this SUPER methodology as actual improvement actions are initiated from this phase. The first action is to realize what and where the problem causes are. The investigation is based on real

IJOPM

observation, surveys, or analysis of relevant process data. For specific causes,

there may be more than one possible solution. The cause and effect diagram (also known as the fishbone diagram) is recommended as a tool to identify all potential causes that are contributing to the problem. Then the PIT can pinpoint major causes more easily.

The PIT should select the best and effective path(s) for improvement. The

selection depends on the assessment of the company's capacity as well as the estimated return due to the changes. For example, if there is a major gap in the performance of a key business process that directly affects the business and well being of the company and need to be addressed urgently, the organization should consider reengineering. Other process improvement techniques like CPI, that is less risky, can be used for handling smaller, less urgent performance problems.

After determining the improvement path(s), a comprehensive action plan should be developed that shows clearly the key implementation steps, dates, costs, and accountable staff prior to changing the processes so as to increase the chance of success of the program. Clearly, delegated authority and responsibility and well defined roles of PIT members and other directly and indirectly involved personnel effect better communication and instill a spirit of commitment and cooperation when implementing the action plan.

2.5 Phase five: review the improved process The purpose of this phase is to evaluate the improvement results and ensure whether the operation performance of the problematic processes have achieved the customers requirements and/or the desired state. If the answer is positive, another improvement program may or should continue in the new areas by following the SUPER cycle again. There are three activities in the final phase of SUPER (Steps 13 to 15 of Figure 2).

The improvement program does not end when the original processes have been changed. The changed processes should be evaluated to judge whether the change is successful. Usually, the changes cannot completely achieve the goals in one go and slight modification should be made until the changes actually improve the

process performance to the states required. The final task in the SUPER model is to continuously monitor the successful factors and results, and then to repeat the cycle for the other process(es). The improvement loop will be continued and eventually lead the organization towards the best class in the industry.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

3. Case study: Bold Ware Optical (Metal) Manufactory Limited This section demonstrates a practical case application of SUPER in the Hong Kong/China industry environment. In this company, a BPI program was carried out by following step-by-step the SUPER methodology described in the previous section.

3.1 Background Bold Ware Optical (Metal) Manufactory Limited is one of the subsidiaries of Moulin International Holdings Limited, which is a medium sized manufacturing 3.1 Background Bold Ware Optical (Metal) Manufactory Limited is one of the subsidiaries of Moulin International Holdings Limited, which is a medium sized manufacturing

A SUPER Bold Ware has been stressing the importance of upgrading quality standard, methodology for

increasing the production capacity, maximizing productivity and costs control in

BPI

its core manufacturing business, employees felt that they should still improve internal operations, especially when the number of complaints from customers was increasing (see Table VIII). The sales manager was interested in improving customers' satisfaction as it will directly affect the sales volume and ultimately

profitability. Data also revealed that the revenue of its internal customer, BM Optical Manufactory Ltd, suffered a certain amount of decline because of customer dissatisfaction, which directly influenced Bold Ware's annual profit (see Figure 3). Executives of Bold Ware, together with other functional managers, held several meetings to discuss this matter. The following BPI program conducted in Bold Ware illustrates how the company improved their operation performance in accordance with the steps of the SUPER methodology.

Bold Ware's improvement program has been carried out since August 1997. Some preliminary information and data about Bold Ware in this study were obtained through careful review of the organization's reports, annual reports, internal memorandums and notices, operations or statistical records, and so on. On

20 April and 1 May 1998, Lee K.T., the author, interviewed individually the first three members of the PIT (see Table I) concerning their BPI efforts during the last year. Furthermore, Lee spent two days on 5-6 May 1998 on-site to study at first hand of their production plant at Chao Yang Shi, Guandong, China. This visit provided an opportunity to interview the last three PIT members and to observe

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Figure 3, Bold Ware's internal and external customers

IJOPM

and understand their daily operation processes as well as their improvement

results.

3.2 Bold Ware's BPI program The following study observed from Bold Ware's Chao Yang production site revealed that the organization's improvement program followed the SUPER

steps as shown in Figure 2. Data from the evaluation of the outcome indicated that these improvement steps taken had raised Bold Ware's business performance and reduced the customers 'dissatisfaction.

3.2.1 Forming the PIT. Having analyzed the existing situation in August 1997, the executives of Bold Ware decided to take a proactive approach to the improvement effort. The first job they did was to create a six-member cross- functional team (see Table I). Since each team member came from a department that performed different processes, each member brought a different perspective to the team and their combined knowledge and input would generate synergy and result in success. The PIT's terms of reference, responsibility and delegated authority were explicitly spelled out by Mr Dicky Tong, the Director in Business Development Section under Moulin International Holdings Limited, who was in charge of this BPI project. Their goal was to improve the existing operation processes so as to satisfy the customers' requirements.

3.2.2 Identify final output and end customers. The team re-affirmed that the main products produced in Bold Ware were the spectacle accessories. So, the first task of the PIT was to identify who the company's core internal or external customers were. These end customers would finally receive and use the final products. With the help of the sales manager, a list of potential candidates were identified in Table II. The team then ranked the customers according to which customer was the most important to satisfy.

Team role

Leader Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Mr Frankie Lau

Operation support

Assistant manager

Mr Ma

Sales

Sales manager

Member

Ms Nancy Wong

Purchase

Purchasing manager Member

Production manager Member Table I.

Mr Yu

Production

Assistant production manager Member The formation of PIT

Mr Ho

Production

Mr Kevin Wong

Quality assurance

Quality assurance manager Facilitator

Customer's name

Priority order Remarks

Baush & Lomb (B&L) Pad-Arm

1 External customer

3 Internal customer Table II.

Moulin Optical Manufactory Limited

2 Internal customer A list of end customers Other external spectacle manufacturing company

BM Optical Manufactory Limited

4 External customer

Based on the decision criteria of the buying volume and number of

A SUPER complaints received, the team identified the Baush & Lomb Pad-Arm was methodology for the largest external buying customer and therefore ranked it the highest

BPI

priority on the list. The subsequent analysis was to concentrate on this customer. During the ranking process, the team's company-wide experience

was invaluable in that they did not need to spend too much effort and time to review the historical data or establish any elaborate ranking system in

the prioritizing of the critical customer(s).

3.2.3 Identify customer requirements. The team's next task was to determine the customer requirements. From the sales manager's experience, the aspects of products which have been criticized most by the customer were the quality of products, which include surface cleanliness and dimensions correctness of the spectacle accessories.

3.2.4 Identify and select relevant processes. In accordance with the two requirements specified above, the team members brainstormed through a list of relevant operation processes that were related to the specific requirements and finally selected two processes, namely ``raw materials delivery process'' and ``quality checking process''. The team members believed that the former process probably caused scratches on the material's surface due to mishandling in delivery while the problem of the latter could lead to bias in the quality requirements as the quality assurance (QA) staff did not follow the formal or standardized sampling method (see Table V for detailed problem descriptions). Following further discussion, the team decided to examine and improve both of these processes concurrently. A good materials delivery process could play a key role in the quality prevention function while a well controlled quality checking process could improve the quality appraisal function. Both of them would help to satisfy customers' requirements which, incidentally, was one of the explicit missions of the company.

3.2.5 Identify and map the process tasks and sub-tasks. In order to understand the details of the selected process, the team members broke down the processes into a series of small tasks and mapped them out with the help of a flow

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

diagram, as shown in Figure 4. During this mapping analysis, the PIT was able to uncover the interrelationships between both the materials delivery process and the quality checking process. They realized that some of the processes' tasks must be changed so that the customer requirements could be more effectively met.

3.2.6 Identify problem areas. Process problem areas are causing gaps in meeting customer requirements. To close these performance gaps, the improvement team identified the problems that were related to the major tasks of the work process. Taking into account the feedback received from customers, the team identified the following problems:

scratches appeared on the product's surface;

dots appeared on the surfaces of products ;

product dimensions were not right.

IJOPM 21,5/6

Figure 4. Process mapping

By tracing these problems to the specific process tasks, a problem areas matrix was formed, as shown in Table III. This matrix helps to narrow the scope of the analysis.

Having analyzed the problem areas matrix, the critical task in materials delivery process was task No. 1, while in the quality checking process it was

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

task No. 3 as these tasks involved the greatest number of problems. The matrix also highlighted that the scratches problem were the crucial factor within both processes, whereas the dots problem was also equally important in the quality checking process. The following improvement activities were then focused on those critical tasks.

3.2.7 Performance benchmarking. Up to this step, the PIT members understood that the selected process performance could be improved if they solved the problems of the critical tasks. In order to make the improvement program to be measurable and objective, the team conducted a benchmarking study to measure the performance the of quality checking process as well as to compare the performance with industry standard or best practice. As mentioned previously, the benchmarking processes usually involves four major activities:

A SUPER

Dimensions

Major tasks

Major tasks

Scratches

Dots

of products

total

methodology for BPI

Process: materials delivery process No. 1 Raw materials delivered from suppliers

No. 2 Materials delivered

to stock

No. 3 Stock reporting No. 4 Check stocking record No. 5 Materials delivered to production cells

Problem areas totals

Process: quality checking process No. 1 QA staff check the dimensions and surface cleanliness of the materials

No. 2 Receive and certify the materials No. 3 QC staff check the dimensions and surface cleanliness for each production stage

No. 4 QA staff make overall checks on the dimensions and surface cleanliness of the products

No. 5 Certify and packaging

0 Table III. Problem areas tools

3 3 1 7 Problem areas matrix

(1) determine what to benchmark;

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

(2) determine who to benchmark; (3) data collection; and (4) gaps analysis.

In Bold Ware's case, its PIT members agreed to benchmark the defective rate measured from the quality performance of raw materials and the products. The measurement criteria would be concentrated on the rejection due to surface appearance of scratches and dots, wrong dimensions and so on. On the other hand, an international standard, MIL-STD-105E LEVEL II 1.5, was set as the benchmarking objective. The MIL standard clearly indicated that the acceptance/rejection level, i.e. the number of defectives from the sampling

specimens, should not be more than a specific level, otherwise the products would be rejected.

IJOPM

Bold Ware's quality control and assurance before August 1997 was actually

quite poor. The team members discovered that the quality checking processes neither followed any standards or clear and consistent guidelines, nor kept the inspection results in proper records. Thus, the improvement team had to measure such performance data from scratch. This meant that the gaps analysis step could not be performed during the benchmarking study.

3.2.8 Set process improvement (PI) goals. A total of 4 percent defectives was the maximum number of the total sampling specimens according to the quality standard, at or below this level was thus the improvement goal of the future quality performance set by the PIT.

3.2.9 Analyze potential causes. In Bold Ware's case, the critical problem was poor products quality. This effect had resulted in customers' dissatisfaction and complaints. The PIT analyzed this problem and separated the major causes into three categories. The team then further analyzed these categories and brainstormed the potential problem causes of each. Figures 5 and 6 were the cause-effect diagram and Pareto chart which summarized this analysis respectively. Table IV quantifies the occurrence frequency of each problem cause from Figure 5, while their respective definitions are given in Table V.

3.2.10 Identify and select solutions. According to the five major causes of problems, the improvement team members organized their ideas and finally came up with the following solutions to solve the identified problems. The detailed descriptions of these alternatives are shown in Table VI.

3.2.11 Develop action plan and implementation. The above problem-solving decision resulted in the improvement action plan as shown in Table VII that explicitly stated the workload distributions and the responsible person or group for each solution. According to this plan, the team members went on to execute their respective improvement tasks.

3.2.12 Evaluate the improved processes. After implementing the above solutions, the PIT evaluated the improvement results to see whether the process problems had been reduced or eliminated. The following results (see Table VIII) were recorded before and after August 1997.

From the above evaluation results, the operation performance has improved by 50-100 percent within three different measure criteria. Despite the improvement, the PIT was not completely satisfied because there was a subsequent problem that needed to be tackled as explained below.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

3.2.13 Refine the improved processes. First, the PIT found the information management problem had become very crucial for the large amount of operation records such as quality checks results and data collection worksheets, etc. that need to be kept in files. They knew that the information/ data volume would be so large that it would explode one day if they do not take some steps to solve this problem.

In order to deal with this problem, Mr Lau decided to computerize the information system (the original one was managed manually). He installed one computer system and started at the QA department for a pilot test. Although the computerized information system began only a short while ago, the

A SUPER methodology for BPI

Figure 5. Cause and effect diagram

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Figure 6. Pareto chart

situation has been much improved in the management of information/data storage or retrieval.

3.2.14 Monitor the results. As the quality checking processes have to be recorded and the final results must be approved by the manager before being passed on to next stage, the improvement is real and sustained. Now, Mr Lau, the assistant manager and PIT leader, is looking forward to performing

IJOPM

another new improvement project so that the business operation will become

more efficient and its performance will continuously increase until the day of achieving the world class level.

4. Findings Literature has shown that CPI relies on building a fundamental

understanding of the capability of processes and the root causes for any gaps between them (Tenner and DeToro, 1997). For most cases, some statistical techniques or tools would be adopted (Davenport, 1993). The aim of CPI is to improve the non-value-added or low efficient processes step-by- step, each time targeting at about 10-15 percent of the total improvement so that the business processes can be improved steadily and continuously (Davenport, 1993). Thus, the information technology (IT) that is known as an effective enabler for process reengineering (Tse and Chan, 1996) is less useful. In Bold Ware's improvement program, the CPI concept was adopted but eventually produced a more remarkable BPR-like result! It can be observed in the case, in step 3.2.5, the processes mapping technique was

Cause of problem

No. of times cited as a cause

Percentage of total

1. Quality control problem

2. Materials quality problem

2 22.22 Table IV.

3. QA staff mistakes

1 11.11 Problem causes

4. Delivery problem

1 11.11 summary

5. Materials package problem

Total

1. Quality control problem

QA staff did not follow the standardized quality sampling procedures. They usually performed their jobs by experience and subjective judgement

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

2. Materials quality problem

The raw materials received from suppliers had scratches and dots on the surface. This problem was difficult to eliminate in the manufacturing process and thus affected the final product's quality

3. QA staff mistakes

Sometimes QA staff did not report the real quality problems to the upper levels of management because the QA department was under production department and was reluctant to reveal its mistakes

4. Delivery problem

Sometimes the scratches may be produced during the delivery processes of the raw materials due to the impact and contact among each of them

The materials were not packed tightly enough or correctly, Table V.

5. Materials package problem

indirectly causing scratches on the material's surface Problem elaboration

during delivery

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Problem(s)

To have a more reliable and accurate sampling standardization

1. Sampling

Developed a standard sampling method. The

team decided to use the MIL-STD-105E

method so that the quality control and assurance

inspection method to check the acceptance/

steps could be ensured

rejection quality level of both raw materials and finished products

To avoid the influence from production QA department

2. Restructure

3 Restructured the QA department and separated

it from production department

department that may possibly affect the QA department to reveal the real situations, thus enhancing the reliability of quality control

To establish clear working steps and directions working

3. Provide clear

Set out working and operating procedures and

so that workers can be guided to reach the instructions

instructions for each production and quality

inspection process by means of flow chart as

objective of quality assurance and make sure

well as other documented instructions. Check

these steps are carried out

points on some working steps were also developed for monitoring purposes

To enhance workers' perceptions and equipment

4. Regular

QA department regularly checked and adjusted

all the measurement equipment. Meanwhile, new understanding about their job and thereafter the maintenance and

QA staff should be trained and educated on the quality assurance

workers education

perceptions of equipment maintenance and the understandings of the inspection method

To reduce the possibility of making scratches on materials package

5. Require good

5 Required materials suppliers to pack the raw

the material's surface due to the carelessness from suppliers

materials with plastic wrappings and well

packed in the wood box before delivery. On the and incorrectness of the materials taking other hand, Bold Ware itself also set out the

procedures

materials delivery and stocking procedures that indicate the correct method of moving or delivering the materials

methodology

Problem

Table solutions

SUPER 703

BPI

VI.

for

IJOPM

Responsible

Solution

Action

person/group

Mr Lau gathered the information about the inspection Mr Lau and standardization method under the standard of MIL-STD-105E and

1. Sampling

Mr Wong documented and translated into inspection procedures in

Chinese version. Mr Wong assisted Mr Lau in training the QA staff, concerning the details of the new inspection method. Meanwhile, Mr Wong also educated them about the background and its meanings of sampling and let them understand the importance to the whole quality management program

2. Restructure QA Mr Lau received the commitment of top management Mr Lau,

department

as well as the agreement of the production manager to Mr Yu and restructure and separate the QA department from the

Mr Ho production department. Mr Yu passed the records to him, such as the information of QA staff and the quality measurement files. The new QA department would directly report the works to his operation support department

3. Provide clear

Mr Lau and Mr Wong together established the working Mr Lau,

working

procedures and instructions for the quality inspection Mr Wong and

instructions

processes, in which QA staff are required to record the personnel of inspection results. Besides, those works in the

the production production processes that Mr Yu was responsible for

department

were also included

4. Regular

QA staff were required to check the measuring Personnel of

equipment

equipment for each certain time period so as to QA

maintenance

maintain the high measurement accuracy. Special department adjustment must be made when mistakes are found

5. Require good

The purchasing manager, Ms Wong, developed a Nancy Wong

materials

procedure and would follow it to bargain and negotiate

with the suppliers one she received the complaints Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

Table VII. Action plan

package from

suppliers

about the raw materials quality from QA

Before

After Difference

Measure criteria

August 1997 August 1997 (%)

Average number of complaints sent from

internal staff per day

Average number of rejections through QA

2-3 # 62.5-86.7 Table VIII.

department per day

8-15

0-1 # 66.7-100.0 Evaluation results

Average number of complaints received from

3-5

customers per month customers per month

A SUPER ``problem areas matrix'' was applied to identify the problem areas for methodology for specific process tasks and to highlight the most critical problem within the

BPI

whole process. Furthermore, when analyzing the root causes of problem as shown in step 3.2.9, the company also applied the ``cause and effect diagram'' and ``Pareto chart'' to analyze the process. The solutions that came up were by means of standardizing, reorganizing, and monitoring the

existing operating processes, whereas the concept of IT was not highly emphasized. All of these are the common techniques employed in CPI approach. However, the processes performances were finally found to have improved by 50-100 percent (much higher than the normal 10-15 percent expected for CPI approach). The results illustrate the capability of the SUPER methodology that provides realizable benefits and enhancement to

the BPI project within the Hong Kong/China industry environment. This successful implementation of the SUPER methodology provides a guide regarding the proper mix and size of a typical PIT established in the beginning of the improvement cycle. Bold Ware's six-member team included senior and middle level managers from different functional areas, each of them had different lengths of service in the organization and were directly or indirectly affected by the BPI project. This arrangement allowed different experience and perspectives to be assembled in the

improvement project and, more importantly, provided a better communication channel to reflect staff's opinions and comments, thus most of the potential impacts or other negative effects to the organization could

be substantially minimized.

5. Conclusion SUPER is a five-phase methodology which incorporates the key activities of BPR, CPI, and BPB and serves as a road map for an organization to achieve significant improvement in its business operation performance. The skeleton of SUPER has been described in this paper. We consider SUPER a

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

BPI methodology that is relatively easy to follow. It is aimed at helping the small to medium sized companies in Hong Kong/China to latch onto the chain of process improvement. The study of Bold Ware is a practical case which demonstrates a successful example of running the SUPER methodology under the Hong Kong/China industry environment. By following the 15 steps proposed in SUPER, fruitful improvement results were obtained in Bold Ware while the risk of negative impacts of change was dramatically reduced. A well-rounded PIT has contributed to be the success in this case. According to the interviews carried out with the six functional managers who were the PIT members of that improvement project, all were satisfied with the improvement results. The improvement efforts were also approved by Mr Dicky Tong, the Director in the Business Development Section of Moulin International Holdings Limited.

IJOPM

References

Australian Quality Council Limited (AQCL) (1997), ``How benchmarking can improve

organizations'', http://www.aqc.org/benchimp.htm. Caudle, S.L. (1995), Reengineering for Results: Keys to Success From Government Experience,

National Academy of Public Administration, Washington, DC. Chang, R.Y. (1995), Continuous Process Improvement: A Practical Guide to Improving Processes

706 for Measurable Results, Kogan Page, London.

Cook, S. (1996), Process Improvement: a Handbook for Managers, Gower, Aldershot, Brookfield,

VT. Davenport, T.H. (1993), Process Innovation: Reengineering Work Through Information

Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Flanigan, E.M. and Scott, J. (1995), Process Improvement: How to Enhance Your Organisation's

Effectiveness, Crisp Publications, Menlo Park, CA. Harrington, H.J. (1995), ``Continuous versus breakthrough improvement: finding the right

answer'', Business Process Re-engineering & Management Journal, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 31-49. Hiatt, J. (1996), ``Introduction to BPR (reengineering)'', BPR On-line Learning Center series, http://

www.prosci.com/mod1.htm Lee, W.B. and Ho, S.Y. (1997), ``Global manufacturing ± a Hong Kong perspective'', CIRP

International Symposium ± Advanced Design and Manufacture in the Global Manufacturing Era, 21-22 August, Hong Kong, Vol. 1, p. K26.

Mertins, K., Edeler, H., Neubauer, G. and Krause, O. (1996), ``The business engineering process in a complex production environment ± a case study'', Modelling Techniques for Business Process Re-engineering and Benchmarking, IFIP, Chapman and Hall, Bordeaux, pp. 187-97.

Tenner, A.R. and DeToro, I.J. (1997), Process Redesign: The Implementation Guide for Managers,

Addison Wesley Longman, Boston, MA. Tse, K.K. and Chan, A. (1996), Reengineering: the Asian Way, A Do-It-Yourself Guide, K.K. Tse

and Associates, Hong Kong. US Department of Defense (DoD) (1994), ``Framework for managing process improvement'', the

Electronic College of Process Innovation, http://www.dtic.dla .mil/c3i/bprcd/3003s2.htm, section 2, p. 6.

Zairi, M. (1997), ``Business process management: a boundaryless approach to modern competitiveness'', Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 64-80.

Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA At 20:21 19 March 2017 (PT)

This article has been cited by:

1. Jehan Zeb The University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada Thomas Froese The University of British Columbia Vancouver Canada . 2017. Transaction formalism protocol tool in infrastructure management. Construction Innovation 17:2. . [ Abstract ][ PDF ]