Storyboard Showcase

Please complete the short information form about your Storyboard.    Based on the number of Storyboards entered, they may be judged within business type categories.  The categories are:  Education, Government, Health Care, Manufacturing and Service.  Please indicate the category for your Storyboard when you complete the information form.

Storyboard Information Form

The criteria for the competition follows four primary areas: Project Selection, Root Cause Analysis, Solution Development, and Implementation & Impact.  In each of the four categories, the Storyboard is judged on a scale of 1-5.  A score of 5 is the highest total that can be achieved in each category.  The judging criteria show what it takes to achieve a score within the 1-5 range.  The highest score any Storyboard can achieve for each judge is 20.

Section 1:  Project Selection

1 point = Project selected through informal process based on impacted work areas only.  Objectives were also informal. 

·         Objective is informal, i.e., Purchasing department will improve communications with other departments

·         Not made clear what process was used to select this improvement project

·         May include a picture of the team, with names and titles, but little else describing team and project selection

2 points = Project selected based on identified/critical needs within the department or organization.  Objectives established from the onset.  Participants chosen based on impacted work areas. 

·         Will see a formalized objective/mission, but no additional supporting information will be provided on how it was determined, i.e., Purchasing department team will reduce material rejects

·         No analysis/data provided on project selection, and it isn’t clear how the project was selected or who was responsible for its final selection

3 points = Project selected based on data or measures.  Objectives were quantified.  Participants included all applicable immediately impacted stakeholders. 

·         Quantified objective/mission, i.e., Purchasing department team will reduce incoming material rejects by 50%

·         Process clarified on how the organization chose this project, but data analysis not included as part of the organization’s selection criteria (may see a flow chart, but not likely to see a control chart or time study).  Will likely see some link made to an organization’s mission/objective.  Team selection includes team member knowledge, skills, and abilities

4 points = Project selected and tied to organization’s strategic goals/objectives.  Objectives quantified and aligned to the organization’s goals/objectives.  Participants included based on downstream impact. 

·         Link made between team’s objective/mission and that of the organization’s strategic planning objectives (quantified), i.e., Purchasing cycle time will to be reduced by 25% (organization’s strategic planning objective).  Team objective – reduce incoming material rejects 50% as part of effort to reduce overall purchasing cycle time by 25%.

·         Likely to see at least one display of organization’s quantified strategic plan objectives

5 points = Project selection is a systematic organizational process.  Project impact is measurable relative to competing projects.  Participants included based on skills and knowledge needed for project analysis. 

·         Organizational team project selection process is presented and linked directly and quantifiably to the implementation of the organization’s strategic plan. 

·         Likely to see a chart that lists multiple potential projects the organization could undertake.  Data analysis of project impact is shown on chart that points to the selection of this project.

Section 2:  Root Cause Analysis

1 point = No potential root causes were identified.  Essentially went from project identification to solution implementation. 

·         Will see a chart listing final root causes, but will not see any information on how those root causes were chosen.

2 points = Informal process used to identify potential root causes.  List of potential root causes narrowed based on non-data driven process. 

·         Will see a chart listing some potential root causes.  The final root causes chosen were done on an informal basis, i.e., voting, nominal group technique, affinity diagram, brainstorming lists, simple flow charts, weighting, fishbone diagrams (with no supporting data provided)

3 points = Beginning use of data and quality tools to identify potential root causes.  Once a list of potential root causes was identified, data and the use of additional quality tools were utilized to narrow the list of potential root causes. 

·         Will see full list of potential root causes

·         Team narrowed down the full list to the final root causes through beginning data analysis techniques such as check & tally sheets, in-depth flow charting, cost calculations, fishbone diagrams (must show evidence of using more than voting or intuition)

4 points = The root cause analysis process was data and/or measurement driven.  Statistical tools used to validate the selection of the root cause. 

·         Will see full list of potential root causes

·         Team narrowed down the full list to the final root causes through data driven techniques such as control charts, run charts, pareto charts, histograms, scatter diagrams, flow charts accompanied with time and motion studies

5 points = Multiple quality and/or statistical tools utilized to identify potential root causes and to narrow the list to the final root cause(s).  Validation of selected root cause(s) undertaken as a separate process. 

·         Will see the same information as in 4 points, but will additionally see test results validating root causes chosen, i.e., purchasing department identified a root cause for material rejection being insufficient lead time provided to suppliers.  The team will have conducted tests using various lead times to determine if this is a cause for increased material rejects

 Section 3:  Solution Development

1 point = Solution was developed and implemented without undergoing root cause analysis. 

·         Will show a solution that’s been chosen, but provide no forms or supporting data to substantiate selecting the solution

2 points = Informal process used to identify potential solutions.  List of potential solutions narrowed based on non-data driven processes. 

·         Will see a chart listing some potential solutions.  The final solutions chosen were done on an non-data driven basis, i.e., voting, nominal group technique, affinity diagram, brainstorming lists, simple flow charts, weighting, force field analysis

3 points = The solution selection process was data and/or measurement driven.  Statistical tools used to validate solution selection. 

·         Will see a full list of potential solutions

·         Team narrowed down the full list to the final solution through data driven techniques such as control charts, run charts, pareto charts, histograms, scatter diagrams, flow charts accompanied with time and motion studies

4 points = Once a solution was selected through a defined process, a one-time trial was conducted to determine effectiveness of the solution before full implementation. 

·         Will see the same information as in 3 points, but will additionally see data from the trial and an explanation of the trial and its parameters

5 points = Once a solution was selected through a defined process, a formal trial was conducted, including the use of multiple data points, to determine effectiveness of the solution relative to alternative solutions. 

·         Will expect to see elements supporting a full trial such as Design of Experiments, blind studies, regression analysis

·         Data collection methodology, including collecting new data, are needed to support this effort

 Section 4:  Implementation & Impact

1 point = Entire solution has yet to be fully implemented.  Final results not yet available. 

·         May see preliminary results, or trial results, but these are not to be confused with a fully implemented project with associated results.

2 points = Solution was implemented with a system in place to measure and track results.  Results tracked to the original goal/objective.  Project may have had a one-time impact, or was generally isolated to a specified work area. 

·         This project will show results with a “one-time” impact to the organization and/or stakeholders

·         Likely to show the project influenced an isolated area only.

·         Should see the results linked directly back to the original goal/objective

3 points = Solution implementation was undertaken with appropriate training and contingencies identified. Results were related to the original goal/objective, which were then tied back to the organization’s strategic objectives.  Project may have resulted in the establishment of new procedures and/or processes. 

·         Will see a chart on training needs

·         Will see a chart on contingencies identified and considered prior to implementation

·         Will see the results linked directly back to the original goal/objective and see those further linked back to the organization’s strategic goal/objectives

·         Could see a chart on new processes/procedures implemented as a result of project

4 points = Results of full implementation were matched to the trial results.  Ancillary benefits able to be quantified. 

·         Will see a link between trial data and implementation data; if there is a disparity, expect to see an explanation provided

·         Ancillary benefits are listed, with corresponding data provided on the benefits

5 points = Project’s impact was leveraged to other processes.  Due to project’s impact, major measurable changes undertaken within the organization., i.e., other branches, departments, units, companies. 

·         Will see a link showing influence of project on overall organization

·         May see data from other impacted areas that have implemented improvements related directly to this project

·         May see a chart showing how this project positively impacted and changed the organization’s strategic plan