Continuous Process Improvement

Project Definition

Organizational effectiveness is an issue that has attracted considerable attention in the modern business environment. This issue has been the subject of numerous studies across various fields including the military. The increased focus on organizational effectiveness is attributable to the critical role it plays in successful execution of organizational mission in order to realize the established goals and objectives. In the past few years, the U.S. Air Force has used various techniques and metrics to determine organizational success and effectiveness. Some of these metrics include the performance of an organization’s leaders, operating environments, and specific mission tasking (Taylor, 2017). Additional measures toward enhancing organizational effectiveness in the U.S. Air Force include the development of Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century (AFSO21), which seeks to create efficiencies and enhance combat capabilities across the Air Force (The Intellectual and Leadership Center of the Air Force, n.d.).
Problem Statement
Despite the establishment of various metrics and techniques for enhancing organizational effectiveness in the Air Force, military organizations still experience challenges that hinder their effectiveness. This Air Force squadron is currently facing problems relating to timely processing of 1,000+ USAFE IMT 79’s, which is characterized by delays. The specific issue experienced by this organization is delays in the timely processing of 1,000+ USAFE IMT 79’s, Request for Base Entry Identification. In the current framework, the process currently takes up to 4 weeks instead of the desired 1 week. Delays in the processing of request for base entry identification has significant impact in the effectiveness of this military organization and mission execution. The organization seems to be experiencing a degradation of performance in internal processes relating to processing requests for base entry identification. The current framework for handling this internal process seems outdated and overtaken by the fast-paced nature of military operations due to rapid technological advancements. As a result, the organization seems to be falling further behind its adversaries since its internal operations on handling of 1,000+ USAFE IMT 79’s is characterized by waste. Based on the categorization of Classic Waste, the current problem facing the organization falls under Waiting, which involves delays in construction or customer delays in check-out lines (Villanova University, 2017).
This project seeks to address the causes for these delays and eliminate waste through the implementation of a 15-week Squadron Process Improvement. The proposed solution for addressing this problem is the creation of a new processing system to enhance handling of requests for base entry identification. According to Steiner (2006), electronic communications request systems have been found effective in handling processes and improving workflow when processing USAFE requests. The proposed solution for dealing with this problem will be deemed effective if it contributes to timely processing of request for base entry identification within a week from the current 4-week period.
Project Type and Level
The project type and level for addressing the identified problem is Limited Evolutionary endeavor dealing with a 2 ½ year problem of the processing time of the USAFE IMT 79.
Addressing the Issue/Problem
When looking at or addressing the problem, an analysis needs to take place using a cost-effective and easy technique. Since this project has no funding for it other than manpower, the easiest and cost-effective measure for conducting an analysis of the issue or problem is observation. Heneman III, Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller (2015) state that observation of job incumbents performing a job is a suitable way of learning about tasks, context, and KSAOs. This easy and cost-effective technique provides thoroughness and wealth of information in an unparalleled manner to any other method of conducting an analysis. Observation is also suitable for analysis of this problem/issue since it’s the most direct technique of collecting data or information since it does not rely on secondary sources of information. Through using this technique, insights relating to the problem/issue will be collected in a direct manner.
Using the uploaded AFSO21 and the Villanova LSSBB Book of Knowledge as guidelines, the team will observe the process, create a flowchart, identify potential root causes using the Cause-and-Effect Diagram (Fishbone diagram), Develop Countermeasures using PICK (Possible, Implement, Consider, Kill) chart. Furthermore, the team will See Countermeasures through, Confirm Results & Process, and finally, standardize the successful processes. Additionally, the team will track for 30 days the time consumed from initiation through completion/pick-up of the paperwork as a baseline.
The process in this project starts with customer initiation through completion/pick-up. The team will examine the current process and potential causes for delays through observation. Each step from customer initiation to completion/pick-up will be observed and analyzed to determine if there are any delays and their causes. During this process, the capabilities of the designated team members to carry out these steps in a timely and efficient manner will also be examined. This will help in determining whether the problem is brought by human factors or attributable to issues in the current system. The project will seek to identify the reasons for the delays and seek approval from the Sponsor for immediate implementation. However, the scope of the project will not include the DD Form 577, Appointment/Termination Record – Authorized Signature, but rather only look at the causes for delays and eliminate waste thus creating timely processing (flow).
Project Timeline
An important aspect toward achieving the desired goals and objectives of the proposed project is the establishment of a clear and concise project timeline for each activity. A project timeline is vital towards tracking project status and deadlines for each activity. This proposed project will be carried out between 8th May to 5th August. The project timeline and key milestones are as follows…
· 8th May – First Meeting
· The implementation of the proposed project will commence on 8th May with a meeting between the relevant stakeholders in the organization and the project team. The meeting will discuss probable Process Improvement Projects based on the identified problem/issue currently facing the organization. This is an important step in the execution of this project since there are various kinds of process improvement projects that are suitable for different types of problems.
· 15th May – Second Meeting
· A second meeting will be held a week after the first one to discuss flowchart of USAFE IMT 79. This meeting will focus on discussing the current and desired status of USAFE IMT 79 based on the flowchart. This will play a crucial role in understanding the problem and the most suitable solution for addressing it.
· 5th June – Third Meeting
· The third meeting will discuss updates and receive data on USAFE IMT 79’s processed and processing time as a baseline.
· Additionally, countermeasures to the identified issues or concerns in handling request for base entry identification will be discussed.
· 19th June – Fourth Meeting
· This meeting will focus on two major things beginning with a discussion of the implementation of countermeasures.
· It will also involve receiving an update on the implementation process.
· 1st July – Interim Project Update
· This will involve receiving an interim project update regarding the implementation of project.
· 10th July – Sixth Meeting
· The meeting will confirm the results of the implementation process.
· This meeting will also involve making necessary enhancements to the implementation process in relation to the desired goals and objectives of the proposed solution.
· 24th July – Seventh Meeting
· The meeting will focus on confirming results and standardizing the process of project implementation.
· The standardization of the process will be based on analysis of the improvements made during the previous meeting.
· 5th August – Project Submission
· This is the final part of project timeline, which will involve submission of the project to the Sponsor for immediate implementation.
· The project will be submitted for final grading or review based on the identified issue/problem, proposed solution, the implementation process, and the anticipated results from the project.
Pre-project Analysis
Based on analysis of the current situation, the problem has been going on for a long period of time i.e. 2 ½ years. I expect the implementation of this project to be relatively smooth, but with some challenges also. I suspect since the problem has been ongoing for 2 ½ years plus, I’m concerned we might come across more problems than anticipated. However, the project team will help in ensuring its successful implementation through ensuring we don’t go outside the scope of the project. The project team is expected to provide effective leadership on the implementation process.
I expect the interim project update during the fifth meeting of project execution to demonstrate the various challenges relating to the implementation process. I also expect the update to show some unexpected results from the execution process. These challenges and un-expected results will be used as the premise for creating countermeasures to ensure the project is implemented within its scope. In essence, the countermeasures will be the basis for development of necessary improvements to the project and its execution.
I also expect the necessary improvements to help generate the desired results of the proposed solution to the problem. However, the introduction of these necessary improvements could extend the project completion date. The project is likely to extend beyond the anticipated completion date because of the extra demands and needs on the project team and other organizational stakeholders. While the project team will work to ensure its implemented within the established scope, these necessary improvements would generate changes that are likely to extend the completion of the project. Nonetheless, I do not expect the changes to increase project implementation costs because the project has no source of funding except manpower. Therefore, the introduction of changes will create need for additional manpower.
Challenges
One of the anticipated challenges during the implementation of the project is job incumbents who are relied upon in most job analysis systems (Heneman III, Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2015). Job incumbents are relied on in job analysis systems given the familiarity with job context, tasks, and KSAOs. Since the project will rely on job incumbents as the main source of data for problem identification and development of a solution, some skepticism should be maintained following the observation of the process. If the job incumbents provide wrong data, the interpretation and understanding of the problem could be inaccurate. In such an instance, the project is likely to be ineffective in addressing delays in processing of requests for base entry identification.
Secondly, feelings of distrust and suspicion may greatly hamper unit member’s willingness to function capably as sources. This would significantly affect the data collection process and project implementation process. The implementation of this project requires trust and willingness of unit members to function capably as sources. Without such trust and willingness, the data collection process would be significantly hampered.
The third issue relating to job incumbents is their likelihood to deliberately inflate processes of tasks in order to make the entire process appear more difficult than it is. This could prove to be a major challenge because problem identification and development of a suitable solution requires actual estimation of the significance processes of tasks. The potential to inflate the importance of the procedures could result in complexities in problem identification and project implementation processes.
The other major challenge in the execution of this project is issues relating to job design vs. job redesign. The introduction of changes to the organization’s operations would generate the need for re-training of job incumbents. Since the proposed solution directly relates to organizational processes, its implementation would create changes in the functions of some unit members. In this case, the execution of the project would necessitate training and education of organization and installation personnel on updated processes. The training and education will be pushed out via email and at installation functions.
Roadblocks
As there have been laudable complaints from the Director of DeCA operations within USAFE, as well as the rest of our external customers, I don’t foresee any roadblocks in fixing or streamlining this process. Only major roadblock would be if something were to kick off with either Russia, Iran or North Korea over the next 15 weeks. This would be a major roadblock because Squadron Process Improvement will take 15 weeks. In such an instance, there would be complexities and conflicts on whether to respond to any emerging situation or continue with the process improvement.
The second major roadblock that could affect this project is the scarce manning or human resource in the organization. The project is designed in a manner that it would require manpower for implementation given that it has no source of funding. The need for manpower in this project is attributable to the fact that it focuses on examining processes beginning with customer initiation through completion or pick-up. These processes are carried out by the different unit members or people in the organization. Therefore, any changes in the organization’s processes would require manpower or changes in the functions of job incumbents. However, the organization currently faces scarcity of human resources for its various functions and operations. The lack of adequate manpower in the organization could be a major roadblock in project development and implementation.
Sponsor Sign-off
Project Name:
Project Sponsor:
Project Manager:

1. Project Summary

Start Date

Finish Date


Project Duration




2. Project Goals

Were project goals met?






3. Project Deliverables

Were project deliverables met?






4. Any Comments?







5. Document Signatures

Name
Description
Signature
Date

Project Manager
Name: ____________
__________________
__________________
By signing, I acknowledge that I have provided details of project requirements and deliverables and that all information listed herein is correct.





Project Sponsor
Name: ____________
__________________
__________________
By signing, I acknowledge that I have received all the stated project requirements and deliverables and make commitment to sponsorship.






References
Heneman III, H.G., Judge, T.A. & Kammeyer-Mueller, J.D. (2015). Staffing organizations (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Steiner, C. (2006, March 15). USAFE Acquires New Standard for Processing IT Requirements. Retrieved from Official United States Air Force Website: http://www.usafe.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/256665/usafe-acquires-new-standard-for-processing-it-requirements/
Taylor, T. (2017, April 19). Improving the Air Force Squadron Command Selection Process. Retrieved from Air University website: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1041989.pdf
The Intellectual and Leadership Center of the Air Force. (n.d.). Air Force Smart Operations for the 21st Century (AFSO21). Retrieved from Air University website: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/af/afso21-fact-sheet.pdf
Villanova University. (2017). Lean six sigma black belt. Villanova, PA: Bisk Education, Inc.