mgmt 6103 - control phase- cmcc

Cookie MonStar Cookie Company:

Lean Six Sigma Process ImprovementAlex Rodriguez

Brandon McKinnieEzekiel JonesJohnny EavesLeonard BurchMalyka Austin

Define Phase

Define Phase—Executive Summary

Cookie MonStar Cookie Company recently invested in a second facility that has state of the art equipment and value-added technological advancements.

Since beginning production, operations has noticed a reduction in customer complaints with the newer facility; however, the older facility has seen an increase in customer complaints and decrease in profits.

The older facility produces fewer units than the new facility but incurs higher labor cost. CMC will invest in equipment upgrades for the older facility and mandate Quality Control training programs for all employees. The new changes will ensure the older facility maintains the same production of output seen capable at the newer facility, while developing a more effective work force.

After changes have been implemented, operations feels that we can reduce customer complaints in the old facility by 50% and increase profits by 15%. Cookie MonStar is dedicated to improving the company’s brand image while improving product quality, business integrity and credibility from every customer.

4

Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter

Problem: CMCC will invest in equipment upgrades for the older facility and mandate Quality Control training programs for all employees. The new changes will ensure the older facility maintains the same product output seen capable at the newer facility, all while developing a more effective work force.

Scope: Implementation of Quality Control training and investing in equipment upgrades for the older facility will greatly reduce customer complaints and increase lagging sales revenue. The newer facility is out of scope.

Goal: The CMCC will reduce complaints at the old facility by 50%, resulting in a revenue increase of $26,000 by the end of December, 2015.

Problem/Goal Statement

Tollgate Review Schedule

Business Impact

CMCC Team Members

Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015Measure: 6/18/2015Analyze:Improve: Control:

Business Case: Cookie MonStar Cookie Company needs to focus more of its attention on quality control. With this as a primary focus, this will alleviate a great deal of customer complaints. Training our employees on our high expectations promotes a natural check and balance equation among departments. We aim to provide quality products to our customers. Focusing on quality will catapult the company’s brand into excellence. Investing in new equipment and specialized standard training will rectify our issues within the older facility.

Financial Impact: Upgrading equipment will reap a substantial impact on our finances; however, improvement is necessary. We do not want to wait too late to try and salvage our credibility. One of our goals is to increase sales by 15% (an additional $26,000 annually) which will alleviate some of the financial strains of purchasing/ leasing new equipment.

Operational Impact: With the usage of new equipment and the training of employees on the importance of quality control at the old facility, we will make a substantial impact on our operational capabilities. The overall goal is to decrease customer complaints by 50%.

Team Members Position Define Phase DeliverablesMalyka Austin Project Coordinator Develop Charter & Compile PowerPointJohnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist SIPOC/ High Level Process Map

Brandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist Stakeholder Communication PlanLeonard Burch Project Manager Gantt ChartEzekiel Jones Project Coordinator VOC

Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator CTQ Tree

Sales and Complaint DataRow Labels Sum of Complaints Sum of Sales Sum of Profit/ Unit Sum of Cost Sum of Cost/Unit Sum of Productivity (Unit/Labor Hr) Sum of Labor Hours Sum of Units Produced Sum of MarginNew Facility 5540 $7,846,798.00 356.2110204 2617667.562 178.34 25806.99383 39261.88854 3846867.68 174.5631Old Facility 11672 $7,800,393.00 342.2709524 2808805.129 192.86 23958.36373 42162.16988 3819987.22 167.5362Grand Total 17212 $15,647,191.00 698.4819728 5426472.69 371.2 49765.35756 81424.05843 7666854.9 342.0993

01-Oct-

14

29-Oct-

14

26-Nov-14

24-Dec-14

21-Jan-15

18-Feb-15

18-Mar-

15$26,000

$27,000

$28,000

$29,000

$30,000

$31,000

$32,000

Old Facility New Facility

Date

Sale

s

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Old FacilityNew Facility

Date

Num

ber o

f Com

plai

nts

Suppliers

Inputs Process Outputs Customer

Viking Henry Farms Cargill Foods Maintenance Duke Power Alibaba Foods Finance

Oven Eggs, Butter, Milk Sugar, Flavoring, Flour Preventive maintenance Gas Chips, Nuts Labor

Select ingredients Mix ingredients Bake ingredients Remove cookies from oven Package cookies Ship cookies

Dough Cookies

Quality Control WarehouseRetailer

Quality Control Warehouse Retailer

Ingredient qualityIngredient quantity

Heating elementThermostat

Conveyor system

Taste, Texture, Color

Quality

Information from plantDock to stock

Employee trainingEquipment uptime

Information systems

Picks per hourCarrier cut time

Speed

Information from WHTag cookies with priceDock to store shelves

Information systems

Employee training and efficiency

Labor efficiency

Cost

Customer Input Metrics Process Metrics Output Metrics

SIPOC

VOC Ranking Matrix

Customer Requirements / Prioritization ToolDate: 15-Jun-15

Customers

▼

Quality

Control

Warehouse

Retailer

Ranking ► 10 10 7

Customer Requirements ▼ Rank % Rank

Quality 10 4 4 168 14.7%Taste 10 1 4 138 12.1%On-Time Delivery 1 7 10 150 13.2%Packaging 10 4 4 168 14.7%Order Replenishment 1 10 10 180 15.8%Accessibility 1 1 10 90 7.9%Size 7 4 4 138 12.1%Quantity 4 4 4 108 9.5%

Stakeholder Communication Plan

Reasons to use Stakeholder Communication Plan:1. Old plant product complaint 47% higher than new plant. 2. Old plant uses 2900.27 more labor hours than new plant to produce 27,880 less units than new plant. 3. Need to indentify stake holders to pin point root cause of problem in old plant.

Gantt Chart

6/1/2015 6/11/2015 6/21/2015 7/1/2015 7/11/2015 7/21/2015 7/31/2015

Cookie Monstars Campaign Project Timeline

Start Date Days Complete Days Behind Days Ahead Today

Measure Phase

12


• The Detailed Process Map was created to assist team in understanding the

overall process steps in detail, also the inputs and outputs required.

• Baking Temperature & Time data shows within USL/ LSL at the old facility;

therefore not cause of cookie hardness.

• Cookie Weight data shows within USL/LSL at the old facility; therefore not

contributing to cookie hardness.

• Taste parameters fall below LSL at the old facility.

• Implementation of quality control checks contribute to the reduction of

complaints.

Key Findings in Measure Phase


Graph

CMCC Team Members

Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015Measure: 6/18/2015 - 6/26/2015Analyze: 6/28/2015Improve: Control:

Team Members Position Measure Phase DeliverablesJohnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist Detailed Process MapEzekiel Jones Project Coordinator X/Y Matrix

Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator Data Collection TableBrandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist Control Chart

Malyka Austin Project Coordinator Updated Charter, PP Compilation

Leonard Burch Project Manager Non Value Add Analysis, Project Plan/ Schedule

Detailed Map Chart

Demand 100

Work Time 12

Takt 0.12

Suppliers

45.00 Minutes

5.00 Minutes

30.00 Minutes

10.00 Minutes

20.00 Minutes

20.00 Minutes

60.00 Minutes

20.00 Minutes

20.00 Minutes

10.00 Minutes

VA/T=175.00 Minutes

NVA/T=65.00 Minutes

PCE=72.92%

500 1000

ProductionControl

2000 1000

Weekly Schedule

Retailer

Weekly Schedule

2000

Ingredients InspectionC/T(Minutes) 45.00Distance 15 ydDefects 0%Operators 2

MixerC/T(Minutes) 30.00Distance 10 ydDefects 0%Operators 5

I

Oven/Production LineC/T(Minutes) 20.00Distance 100 ydDefects <0%Operators 8

I

InspectionC/T(Minutes) 60.00Distance 15 ydDefects <05%Operators 2

I

PackagingC/T(Minutes) 20.00Distance 100 ydDefectsOperators

I

DistributionI

Cookie MonStars Non-Value Added Analysis Value Stream Map

Data Collection Plan Table

• 11/26/2014 Taste Parameters Fall Below LSL

• Hardness Parameters Moved Outside USL/LSL 10/22/2014

• Approximately 30 Days Between Hardness Parameter Fluctuation and Taste Parameters Below LSL

• Hardness Parameters Outside USL/LSL Cause Taste to Fall Below LSL

• Hardness Parameters Outside USL/LSL and Taste Parameters Below LSL Increase Customer Complaints

UCL

LCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE TASTE OLD FACILITY

• Baking Temperatures Within USL/LSL

• Baking Temperatures Not Cause of Cookie Hardness

UCL

LCL

USL

LSL

UCL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING BAKING TEMP. OLD FACILITY

• Baking Times Within USL/LSL• Baking Times Not Cause of Cookie

Hardness UCL

LCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING BAKE TIME OLD FACILITY

• Weight Within USL/LSL• Cookie Weight Not Cause of

Cookie Hardness UCL

LCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE WEIGHT OLD FACILITY

• 10/22/2014 Parameters Move Outside of USL/LSL

• Hardness Parameters Outside USL-LSL Increase Customer Complaints

USL

LSL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE HARDNESS OLD FACILITY

Analyze Phase

Team Members Position Measure Phase DeliverablesJohnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist CharterEzekiel Jones Project Coordinator FMEA

Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator Fishbone DiagramBrandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist F TEST

Malyka Austin Project Coordinator Box Plot of Statistical Tool (F- Test)Leonard Burch Project Manager FMEA

CMCC Team Members



STATISTICAL DATA Key Findings in Analyze Phase

Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015Improve: Control:

Original (No Change)

Test Data (with Improvement Idea)

Mean 51.07380952 50.186Variance 45.38977802 7.927625263Observations 20 20df 19 19F 5.725520129P(F<=f) one-tail 0.000191364F Critical one-tail 2.168251601

Cookie Hardness Before and After Improvement Implementation F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

• Determine and eliminate potential root causes of variation

• Quantify the impact of the root cause

• 82.5% Higher variance in cookie hardness baked with new vendor’s flour

FMEAProcess Step Failure Mode Failure Effects Causes Controls use max

SEV Action Resp TimingMay be process step,

general activity, functional area, or other rational

grouping

What is the potential failure or undesirable outcome for this

area?

If the failure mode occurs, w hat w ill the effect be?

SEV

What is/are the cause/s of the failure?

OCC

What controls are in place to prevent the cause from occuring or to detect

that the cause has occurred?

DET

RPN

What specif ic actions are required to improve the RPN number

Who w ill be accountable for implementing the change

When is completion of the action required or planned

Test Ingredients for Quality

The ingredients doesn’t meet standards.

The cookies will not pass quality control. The cookies will be of dissatisfaction to the consumer

9 Low-quality suppliers 9Supplier scorecards and overall supplier management 3 243

Implement quality metrics for the suppliers that will increase quality standards

The quality control department and plant management

3 months 5 4 1 20

Load the ingredients into the mixer and mix

Ingredients aren't mixed properly

Cookie taste is subpar. 10 Improperly trained employees

8 Additional training time 5 400 Employee training hours is increased by 3 hours per employee

Plant management and human resources.

4 months 6 5 2 60

Load dough into hopper Improperly loading dough into the hopper

Cookie size variance 8 Improperly trained employees

8 Additional training time 4 256 Employee training hours is increased by 3 hours per employee

Plant management and human resources.

4 months 5 5 2 50

Set oven temperature and conveyor speed

Wrong temperature is setCookie hardness levels will either be too hard or soft.

10 Incorrect temperature standards.

7

Proper temperature used consistently for each cookie batch and cookie sample tasting.

1 70 Temperature trial runs to ensure proper emperature for cookie baking

Plant management and quality conrol

3 months 5 2 1 10

Start the Production Line

Production line fails to start or isn’t started promptly

Production Flow Stalls and Ingredients Age 10 Human and Machine Error 3

Human Production Line Trigger and Computer Time Sensors 2 60

Production line test are run every morning during normal operations

Process Manager and Line Manager Daily 8 2 1 16

Transport Cookies to Cooling Chambers

Cookies are not transoported by specified time

Cookie composition is changed ( harder or softer)

8 Human Error 3

Cookies have to reach cooling chambers by a certain time within a certain temperature range

1 24Clear path for cookies to reach cooling chambers, also having themometers in each batch

Quality control manager 1 month 4 1 1 4

Test Cookies for Taste, Texture and Hardness

Cookies will not meet composition standards

Cookies will not pass quality control and will not sell well

9Cookie production process isn't functioning correctly

4Cookie hardness scale and Quality control testing 3 108

Quality at the source will be implemented

Quality control management 3 months 5 2 2 20

Cookie Packaging Packaging quality is insufficient

Cookie packages break and cookies go bad

10 Packaging glue and material

5 Packaging stress testing is performed

4 200 Order and maintian better quality, price efficient glue and materials

Qualitity control over packaging

2 months 6 3 2 36

PSEV

POCC

PDET

PRPN

X/Y Matrix

Statistical Tool: Two-Sample for Variances F-Test

• Tested 20 samples baked with old vendor’s flour

• Tested 20 samples baked with new vendor’s flour

• 82.5% Higher variance in cookie hardness baked with new vendor’s flour

• Conclusion new vendor’s flour cause of increased variance in cookie hardness

Original (No Change)

Test Data (with Improvement Idea)

Mean 51.07380952 50.186Variance 45.38977802 7.927625263Observations 20 20df 19 19F 5.725520129P(F<=f) one-tail 0.000191364F Critical one-tail 2.168251601

Cookie Hardness Before and After Improvement Implementation F-Test Two-Sample for Variances

Current Process

Test Data (with

Improvement Idea)

57.71 51.92

39.90 48.0050.00 50.9640.10 53.0039.90 48.0042.57 54.8050.00 46.3257.43 53.6855.05 48.1655.05 53.5247.52 50.9252.43 45.4050.00 48.2459.71 48.2447.62 47.3662.14 47.4847.57 50.8857.14 50.8854.86 54.2054.76 51.76

Cookies 1 (Hardness Target 50 +/- 5)

Box Plot for Variance Test(New Flour Vendor)

StatisticCurrent Process

Test Process (Old Vendor)

q1 47.56 48Min 39.90 45.4median 51.21 50.88max 62.14 54.8q3 55.57 52.19

Improve Phase

CMCC Team Members



STATISTICAL DATA Key Findings in Improvement Phase

Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete

Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015

Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015

Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015

Improve: 7/11/2015 7/18/2015

Control:

• Identified that the NEW vendor’s flour was not sifted to cookie recipe specifications.

• Made decision to go with the older flour vendor.• Financially, this vendor is more expensive but they

produce a quality product.• Made equipment improvements in the older facility.• Taste & hardness parameters returned to satisfactory

levels.

Team Members Position Improvement Phase Deliverables

Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator Pilot Improved Process

Brandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist Graphical Analysis (Hardness/ Taste)

Ezekiel Jones Project Coordinator Quick Wins

Johnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist Future State Process Map

Leonard Burch Project Manager Pugh Matrix

Malyka Austin Project Coordinator Charter & Project Benefit Worksheet

Pugh Matrix

Criteria Cookie Quality - + + + 6Cookie Taste - + + + 6Sales Improvement - + + + 6 Better +Sustainabilty S + - + 6 Same SFlower Quality S + + + 6 Worse -Cookie Hardness S + + + 3Accessibility S S S + 3Cookie Size S S S + 3 NOTE:Ease of Implemetation S - - - 3 If you do not use the above legend symbols,Order Replenishment - + + + 3 the formulas will not work.Switching Cost S - - - 3Quality Controlable S + + + 3Quantity S + + + 1Cost to Implement S - - - 1On Time Delivery S + S + 1

Sum of Positives 0 10 8 12 0Sum of Negatives 4 3 4 3 0Sum of Sames 11 2 3 0 0Weighted sum of Positives 0 41 34 47 0Weighted sum of Negatives -21 -7 -13 -7 0Total Weighted Score -21 34 21 40 0

Concept Legend

Stakeholder AnalysisGroup Key

Representative

Accountable Responsible Consulted Informed Outcome Accountable

Outcome Impacted

Output End User

Internal/External

Priority (High/ Med/ Low)

Direct/Indirect Involvement

VP Sales Gary Lewis h h h Internal High Direct

Old Plant Director Of Operations

Mike Martin h h h h h h Internal High Direct

Old Plant Line Manager Shift Manager

Larry Jones h h h h h h Internal Med Direct

Old Plant Production Line Employees

Kevin davis h h h h h Internal Low Direct

Stakeholder Analysis (Cont…)

Relationship with / Interest in project

Goals / Success Criteria

Impact on Project What does the project need from this group?

Impact of Project Potential Issues or Concerns

Needs Management Strategy / Method of Communication

Project Sponsor

To provide funding and oversight.

Project overseer Ultimate approval ROI, Credibility, Increased revenue

Financial loss Financial estimates Weekly progress meeting (Conference calls)

Project Manager

Overall direction and leadership. Ensure proper project implementations

Daily project direction Leadership and the necessary resources and information needed

Customer satisfaction,Customer demand, Increased production, Operational effectiveness

Timely implementation and customer response

Face to Face meetings concerning project progress . Understanding of the provided solution and approval decision rights. Consistent dialogue with the project supervisor and the master black belt

Conference calls and daily face to face meetings

Project Supervisor

Faciliate the process improvements and managing of new process

Daily project management

Management and detail

Quality and process efficiency

New process handling and time

Site meetings/visits with master black belt. Daily communication with project manager

Daily Face to face meetings and training sessions

Project Specialist

Successfully carry out the implementations and improvement initiatives

Carry out the new improvements

Personal insight and empowerment

Performance and productivity

Familiarity and execution

Training

Pilot Improved Process

Go back to the new flour vendor and ask for a flour that better suits our needs. Meantime buy flour from old vendor until new vendor provides flour to our specifications.

Measure the hardness, taste of the cookies, and customer complaints.

If measures are bad, return to analyzing data to determine another cause.

If measures improve, problem correctly identified and project a success.

Cost Benefit AnalysisProject:

All values based on 12 months of savings starting 6/23/2015 Check OneInitital Estimate

Benefits Final Project Closure Values X

Cost of Services Project CostsMaterial reduction Equipment 89,000Direct Labor reduction ReorganizationVariable Overhead reduction Project Team 10,000

Total Project Costs 89,000

Fixed Overhead Net Annualized Savings 57,500Lease reductions/eliminationsIndirect Labor reduction Soft Savings (description and quantification):Maintenance cost reductions 140,000

Cost of Poor Quality Scrap reductionRework reduction 6,500Warranty cost reductionCost Avoidance

One time Savings (Cash Flow)Benefits Raw material Inventory reduction 29,000Profit on extra services due to capacity increase WIP Inventory reduction

Finished Goods Inventory reductionAccounts Receivable reductionSale of Unneeded Assets

Total Annualized Benefits 146,500

Total One Time Savings 29,000

Black/Green Belt approval(Signature and date)Finance Representative approval(Signature and date)

Project Benefits

Leonard Burch 6/23/2015

Malyka Austin 6/23/2015

Cookie MonStars Cookie Company

Improved customer service by 50% and increase in sales by 10%!

Load the ingredients into the mixer and mix

6

Turn dough out of mixer into transport

tub7

Transport dough to hopper at production

line8

Load dough into hopper

9

Set oven temperature and conveyor speed

10

Is temperature correct

11

Press start on production line

12

Nozzles press out precise amount of

dough onto conveyor13

NO

YES

Conveyor runs through 300 foot oven

14

Cookies exit the oven and are transported to

cooling chambers15

Samples of each batch of cookies sent to

quality control16

Cookies are tested for taste, texture, and

hardness17

Do cookies meet specifications?

18Entire batch is trash

NO

Cookies are sent to be packaged

19

YES

Cookies are transported by truck to

the warehouse20 Are there orders

from retailers?21

Store cookies in the racks

22

Ship the cookies to the retailer

23

NO

YES

Receive ingredients from vendor

2

Test 10% of each ingredient for

proper specifications

3

Send ingredients to store room

5

PASS

FAILRTV for credit and ingredients within

specifications4

Vendor ships ingredients per order

1

Factory receives order1

Send request to store room for ingredients

2

Test ingredients for quality

3

Transport ingredients to mixer

4

FAIL

PASS

Do we have correct ingredients and

quantity?5

NO

YES

Future State Process Map

CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE HARDNESS OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPROVEMENTS

USL

LSLUCLLCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour• Hardness parameter returned to satisfactory levels

USL

LSL

UCL

UCL

USL

LSL

UCL

UCL

CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE TASTE OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPROVEMENTS

USL

LSLUCLLCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour• Taste parameter returned to satisfactory levels

Control Phase

CMCC Team Members



STATISTICAL DATA Key Findings in Control Phase

Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete

Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015

Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015

Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015

Improve: 7/11/2015 7/18/2015

Control: 7/20/2015 7/24/2015

• Suspended contract with New Flour Vendor due to not meeting quality standards.

• Customer’s complaints decreased after switching back to older vendor’s flour.

• Older vendor offered us a discount based on weight.• Considering allowing NEW flour vendor to adjust their

measurements and re-test.

PRIMARY METRIC CHART: CONTROL CHART MEASURING COMPLAINTS OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPROVEMENTS

UCL

LCL

• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour• Customer complaints decreased

USL

LSL

UCLLCL

USL

LSL

UCL

LCL

Control Plan

Communication Purpose Audience Author Vehicle Frequency

Status ReportsTo keep key stakeholders and and team members aware of progress, issues, and solutions.

Team members, VP of Sales, VP of Opertions, Client Contact

Project manager Email Monthly

Team MeatingsTo ensure all team members are apprised of progress, changes, and current priorities

Project team members Project manager Face-to-face Weekly, Monday and Thursday @ 9:00 – 10:00

Email Communications

Things that are not emergencies To distribute meeting minutes, alert team members to document changes posted, share information and answer questions between meetings.

Project team members, Client contact, DC Manager, Old and New Plant Director of Operations, Flower Vendors, Facility Managers

Project team members, Client contact, all Managers, and VPs

Email As needed

Phone / in-personEmergencies/ things that require immediate attention

Team Members, Flower Vendors, Vice President of Operations, Facility Managers, and Retail Client Contacts

Project team members, Client contact, all Managers, and VPs

Company or personal cell phone when appropriate. As needed

Shared Project Folder Retains all current project documentation. Project team members Project Manager, project

team membersIn-Facility Project Office Location

Upload revisions within 24 hours of the change.

Shared Online PortalAllows syncroniczation of all company, vendor, and stakeholder information.

All team members and clearanced stakeholders

All team members and clearanced stakeholders

Stakeholder compnay computer terminals

Daily; As needed to keep information valid

Cookie MonStar Communication Plan

Implementation Plan

SOP for Baking MONSTARS CookiesPurpose: To ensure that each cookie produced is of consistent color, taste and texture per company specification and customer expectation. Responsible Manager: Mike Tomlin Frequency: Every batch produced Procedure: Send request to store room for ingredientsTest ingredients for quality.Transport ingredients to the mixer.Check for correct ingredients and quantities of eachRecord batch number of each ingredient on production sheet.Load ingredients into the mixer per the recipe, add dry first then wet.Press start on the mixer.Once the mixer stops, turn dough out of the mixer into the transport tub.Transport the dough to the production line and load into the hopper.Set the oven temperature to 400 degrees and set the conveyor speed.Once the temperature reaches 400 degrees press start.Once the baked cookies exit the oven load on cooling racks to be transported the cooling chambers

Monitored by: Cookie Supervisor – Casey Hampton aka “Big Snack”

Standard Cookie Recipe:* 100 pounds of eggs 250 pounds of flour125 pounds butter200 pounds sugar75 pounds flavoring130 pounds milk175 pounds chocolate chips145 pound of chopped pecans *Mix dry ingredients first

Project Executive Overview• Project description

o Identify key differences between older and newer facilityo Training on Quality Control standards

• Major changes the project team implemented o Updated cooking equipment in older facilityo Identified flour as the ingredient causing hardness of cookies

• Description of the critical controlled inputs that brought about the improvemento Through QC checks, we identified that flour was the component that caused cookie hardness

• Key learning of the project o Equipment needed upgrading, but was not the main reason for the increase in customer

complaints.o Our new flour vendor was 12% cheaper—but did not meet our quality standards (not sifted

properly)o Strengthened the relationship with our old vendor.

• What impact does this improvement have on the business o Discount received from older vendor with better product.o Quality Increased, Complaints Reduced and $$$ Saved

Control Phase Project Timeline

6/1/2015 6/11/2015 6/21/2015 7/1/2015 7/11/2015 7/21/2015 7/31/2015

Cookie Monstars Campaign Project Timeline

Start Date Days Complete Days Behind Days Ahead Today

mgmt 6103 - control phase- cmcc

Documents