AL Problem Solving Process Manual - Updated 10 - May 2016

Ashok Leyland
Problem Solving Manual

(ALPSM)
Procedure No (as per TS) : -
Issue No: 3
PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016
PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS
Page: 1 of 72
Problem Solving Process Manual – Preface
ALPS (Ashok Leyland Problem Solving) is a customized methodology to drive Problem

Solving culture & practices uniformly across the organization. ALPS is formulated on the
philosophy of TQM (Total Quality Management) using the Plan Do Check Act (PDCA) &
Standardize Do Check Act (SDCA) continuous improvement cycles to meet end-to-end
diverse process stakeholder requirements in AL.
Its inherent strength rests with its clear demarcation for selection of methodology
for various complexity levels of problems, right from simple to complex, studied along with
its impact to the organization. This is achieved by involving various stakeholders across the
organization & beyond to improve quality, productivity, safety, service levels, efficiency,
morale, reduce cost, lead time with positive impact on environment. It emphasizes on a
systematic project management approach with the top leadership drive.
It is deployed through various approaches right from structured investigations at

Gemba, facts & data driven decision making processes along with Total Employee
Involvement (TEI) & robust time bound sustainable actions to achieve desired project
objectives and business goals.
ALPS Methodology signifies a common problem solving language across the

organization for uniform deployment across the value chain. ALPS Methodology would serve
as the DNA for organizational cultural change, and ‘a way of life’ for Problem Solving &
Continuous Improvement in AL to meet its Vision.
Procedure No (as per TS): -
Issue No: 3
Page: 2 of 72
INDEX
# Key Processes Page Nos Total Pages

# Introduction to AL Problem Solving (ALPS) model 04-06 3
Project Identification & Classification
1 08-17 9
(Problem Bank collection & scoping, Project categorization)
Training Identification & Delivery
2 19-23 5
(BPS,APS, Champion, Refresher)
3 Project Registration 25-27 3
4 Problem Solving Project Review 29-32 4
5 Financial Savings Validation 34-36 3
6 Project Closure Review 38-40 3
7 Problem Solving Certifications 42-46 5
8 MIS Reporting 48 1
9 Sustenance Audit & Monitoring 50-51 2
10 Annual Competition with Reward & Recognition (R & R) 53-55 3
# Roles & Responsibilities 57-61 5
# Acronyms Used 63 1
# Annexures Used with Templates 65-73 9
1. Introduction to Ashok Leyland Problem Solving (ALPS)
Model (ALPS)
Procedure No (as per TS) : CQ/LSS/001/V2
Issue No: 3
PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By : Sachin Goel, Head – LSS
Page : 04 of 72
1.0 Introduction to Ashok Leyland Problem Solving Model (ALPS)

Objective: To develop problem solving competency in AL workforce using ALPS model as an
engine for Continuous Improvement by resolving problems in a systematic manner to meet
business goals.
Scope: Applicable to all functions in AL for problem solving
Criteria for identification:
As per the description & methodology, selection matrix given below, refer fig 1.1 & 1.2
Problem solving methodology has been classified into the given four approaches based on
the nature of problem to be solved. Details are given below.
Just Do It (JDI): To address ‘surface level’ problems within the process owner’s span of
control which are basic, small & easy to solve, where root cause/s & solution/s are both
known.
Keiken, Kan, Dokyo (KKD): To address, next higher level of complexity issues compared to
JDI, which are small & easy within process owner’s span of control where the root cause/s
are known, but solution/s are not sure, and hence have to be identified & verified. It is
carried out with a 4 step systematic approach.
Basic Problem Solving (BPS): To address next higher lever of complexity issues compared to
KKD. Seven step PS approach will be used and normally Seven QC tools required to verify
the Root Cause among the known potential Causes.
Advanced Problem Solving (APS): To address next higher lever of complexity issues
compared to BPS with significant impact at a plant function / corporate function level. Seven
step PS approach will be used and normally Statistical tools required to verify the Root
Cause among the known potential Causes.
Deep Dive Projects: To address higher complexity problems with significant impact at
organizational/business/SBU/customer level (multi plant/location/function level). It will also
be Seven step PS approach with Usage of Statistical tools to identify Root Causes. This will
also require higher stake holder involvement due to large scope of Problem.
Issue No: 3
PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By : Sachin Goel, Head – LSS
Page : 05 of 72
AL-PS can be explained by the analogy of an ‘apple tree’ as given in figure 1.1 below, where
the height of the tree can be understood as the ‘complexity’ of the problem, and the apples
at various heights denotes the ‘opportunity’ available. The approaches alongside describes
the ‘vehicle or the effort’ required to tap those opportunities from the ground level.
Fig 1.1
Fig 1.2 explains the classification of the problems/opportunities for improvement under four
categories (JDI, KKD, BPS, APS, DD) based on Impact and Complexity.
Fig 1.2
Procedure No (as per TS): CQ/LSS/001/V2
Issue No: 3
Page: 06 of 72

Four steps of KKD :
Steps Key Deliverables

Select the process Right process selection & area within process
System Analysis Understand & view the problem as a system
Kaizen Plan Frame & carry out improvement action plans
Confirmation Check for effectiveness
Seven steps of Problem Solving (BPS, APS, Deep Dive): Any problem, which uses APS, BPS &
Deep Dive methodology will follow the below seven steps. This will ensure Standardization
and effectiveness in problem solving. Deliverables of Seven Steps are explained as follows.
Steps Key Deliverables

Problem Identification of problem, defining & scoping of projects
Recognition of the features of the problem, understanding the current
Observation
situation of the problem
Investigating all the potential causes of the Problem, arriving at the root
Analysis
cause/s
Solution (Counter Measures) development & implementation to eliminate the
Action
root cause/s
Check To check effectiveness of counter Measure/s
Standardize To ensure & verify sustenance of improvements, horizontal deployment
Conclude Financial savings quantification, certification completion
Process Responsibility: LSS BB, LSS MBB
Process Ownership: Plant or Function LSS BB
Stakeholders Involved: LSS BB, HODs, Sponsors, Plant/Function Head, LSS MBB
2. Problem Identification & Classification (ALPS)
Issue No: 3
PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head - LSS
Page : 08 of 72
2.0 Problem Identification & Classification
Objective: To identify the key impact projects based on Voice of Customer (VOC)/Voice of
Business (VOB) and selection of right problem solving approach to resolve identified
problems to meet Business Goals.
Scope: Applicable to all functions in AL
Process Flow:
Start
Policy Management, Daily Work Management, KRA Gap analysis
Consolidation & scoping of Projects
Impact > 0
Complexity < 20
Rate &
Scrutinize To be taken as
through 2 X 2 JDI or KKD Project
PS matrix
B A
Issue No: 3
Page : 09 of 72
B A
Impact > 0
Complexity > 20 <= 40
Assess grid To be taken up as

position BPS Project
Impact > 0
Complexity > 40
80
Impact > 40
Complexity > 40
Assess grid Assess grid

position position
Impact > 40 Impact > 40

Impact < 40
Complexity > 40 Complexity >= 80
Complexity > 40
To be taken up
Revisit scope
as APS Project To be taken up as
Deep dive Project
End
Criteria for identification: The 2X2 project selection filter consists of two criteria of Impact &
complexity, which are drilled down to several dimensions each with certain weightage to all.
The user is expected to fill the rating column based on the current level of understanding
about the problem with rating to be done as per the rating scale given below without
omitting any column. Refer fig 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 for the templates & refer annexure 1.
Rating/grading scale of 1,3,9 under each criteria depicts the following:
1. 1 – Low
2. 3 - Medium
3. 9 - High
Issue No: 3
Page : 10 of 72
Selection grid - Problem solving methodology
Complexity Score Assessment
Rating Rating guidelines

S.No. Complexity Driver Weightage
(1,3,9) 1 3 9
Regularly / Perennial
Sporadically / Irregular
C1 Frequency of the problem 15 9 Rarely (occuring at regular
(occuring at irregular intervals)
intervals)
Multiple processes in Single Multiple plants / Multiple
C2 Scope at process level 15 3 Single process
plant / Single Location Locations
Selective models (within Across segment & across

C3 Scope at product level 15 3 Single model
segment) models (as applicable)
Degree of process
C4 15 3 Manual Semi or Partially mechanized Fully mechanized
mechanization
Potential causes known based Potential causes not

Knowledge about root cause & All Root causes known;
C5 15 3 on past experience / gut feel, yet known, data collection and
solutions Solution also known
to be validated with data analysis required
Policy management at
Daily work Policy management at
C6 Source of the project 25 1 Function or Plant or
management Department level
Corporate level
Complexity Score 38%
Impact Score Assessment

S.No. Impact Driver Weightage
(1,3,9) 1 3 9
Financial savings (or)

I1 Opportunity loss (in case of non 20 3 < 3.0 Lakhs 3 - 10 Lakhs > 10 Lakhs
cost reduction/non-mfg projects)
Direct impact on Internal

Indirect impact on the Direct impact on End
I2 Impact on customer 20 9 Customer; Indirect impact on
internal customer customer
End Customer
Impact on process/ Shop / Department Plant function / Corporate Business / Company level
I3 20 3
business/stakeholder level metrics function level metrics metrics
I4 Gap between target and actual 20 3 Less than 25% Between 25% to 50% Greater than 50%
Across AL / More than one

I5 Horizontal deployment 20 3 No direct opportunity Atleast one direct opportunity
direct opportunity
Impact score 47%
Fig 2.1
Issue No: 3
Page : 11 of 72
Fig 2.2
Issue No: 3
Page : 12 of 72
Just Do It (JDI) approach: To address ‘surface level’ problems within the process owner’s
span of control which are basic, small, easy, quick to solve, where root cause/s & solution/s
are both known.
Problems can be identified from Gemba observations, DWM which can be completed
without formal budget, does not create a known risk to the business/customer, and if it fails
can easily be reversed. Scope is confined to single or set of actions with less complexity.
Although formal training & CFT are not mandatory, the process owner can use basic tools
such as process mapping to understand process, along with sound process knowledge to
complete the process improvement. Projects can be registered after successful completion
of the actions & achieving desired result.
Examples are given below:
1. To introduce a paint mark on the taper side of axle mounting shaft;

2. To tighten anti sag member bolt in vehicles;
3. To reduce the loading hanger rod diameter in Jigs for OPD gears.
Keiken, Kan, Dokyo (KKD) approach: To address next higher level of complexity issues
compared to JDI, which are small, easy, quick to solve within process owner’s span of
control where the root cause/s are known, but solution/s are not sure, hence may require
moderate level of analysis for the best solution identification.
Problems can be identified from Gemba observations, DWM. The knowledge may be own or
sought from experts. Although formal training & CFT is not mandatory, the process owner
and manager utilize basic tools such as process flow diagram etc, along with sound process
knowledge, collective experience, wisdom, intuition, guts to make the improvement. Scope
of the project is confined to set of actions.
7 QC tools can be used to understand process behavior, not mandatory. It is carried out with
a 4 step systematic approach.
Issue No: 3
Page : 13 of 72
Examples are as follows:
1. To reduce tool cost by changing the insert for grinding operation based on past
successful trials in similar product segment/category in other plants;
2. To reduce power consumption by removing the interface between the main & auxiliary
systems in machines;
3. To reduce consumable consumption by salvaging through filters to separate the oil from
the burr in shop floor.
Basic Problem Solving (BPS) approach: Problems identified from Gemba observations,
DWM, PM (occasionally) from a process, scope within span of control of project leader,
done along with CFT with moderate level of data collection & analysis. Scope could be
confined to one operation/one machine with higher level of complexity compared to KKD.
Prior project registration is compulsory. Root cause and solutions identified through
structured and systematic data collection, application of basic QC tools for analysis decision
making with a CFT & time bound approach with significant function/plant level impact.
The project may need investment for improvements depending on the analysis and can be
validated quickly within short time period. Formal full time training(two days) include,
problem solving process overview along with Q7 and other basic problem solving tools &
application with emphasis during the project on observation at Gemba or at the point of
failure, data collection and analysis, close monitoring. Team constitutes a leader who has
been formally trained, along with 2-4 other CFT members depending on the requirement.
1. To reduce rework in Journal grinding operation from 500 to 100 PPM in Cam shaft line;
2. To reduce tie member mounting hole offset ppm in from 15000 to 5000 PPM in Lynx;
3. To reduce rework in Block Rough Machining line due to 250 angular drill breakage issue
from 5000 to 2000 ppm.
Issue No: 3
Page : 14 of 72
Advanced Problem Solving (APS) approach: Problems identified from DWM, PM, KRA Gaps,
Internal customer complaints, Field issues, Warranty failures which requires higher
statistical tools for data analysis. Formal training program(6 days) include problem solving
process overview with other basic & advanced problem solving tools & application with
emphasis on observation at Gemba or at the point of failure along with data collection &
statistical analysis. Team constitutes a leader who has been formally trained, along with 4-6
other CFT members depending on the requirement.
The project can be with investment depending on the requirement, and can be validated
within a reasonable time period. Prior project registration is compulsory. Root cause and
Solutions identified through structured and systematic data collection, application of
statistical tools for analysis, wherever required advanced statistical tools for decision making
with a CFT & time bound approach. Scope could be confined to multiple processes within a
plant/function with significant plant/corporate function level impact
1. To reduce fixed power consumption in a plant by 70% from current level;

2. To reduce tool cost in Gear hard stage machining in Gear Box line by 25% from the
current level;
3. To eliminate air leak issues in all passenger models in a plant.
Deep dive approach:
Problems identified from PM, KRA Gaps, Customer complaints, Field issues, Warranty
failures with extensive field investigation & analysis involving multiple stakeholders. Formal
training of approx. 10 days, include advanced statistical problem solving tools & application
with emphasis on observation at Gemba or at the point of failure along with data collection
& advanced statistical analysis. Team constitutes a leader who has been formally trained,
along with 6-8 other CFT members depending on the requirement.
Prior project registration is compulsory. Root cause and Solutions identified through
structured and systematic data collection, application of statistical tools for analysis,
wherever required advanced statistical tools for decision making with a CFT & time bound
Issue No: 3
Page : 15 of 72
approach. Scope could be confined to multiple processes, multiple locations & stakeholders
with significant organizational impact. The project may need investment for improvements
depending on the analysis, and can be validated within a considerable time period.
1. To eliminate Synchro ring failures in Gear Box in all Boss & Ecomet models;
2. To reduce FPV due to clutch failures in all Goods & Passenger models.
Process Responsibility: HOD, Sponsor, Project leader, LSS BB, LSS MBB
Process Ownership: Plant or Function LSS BB, LSS MBB, PH
Stakeholders Involved: LSS BB, Plant/Function Steering Committee, HODs, Sponsors,

Plant/Function Head, BU Head, MBB, MD’s office, Corporate Planning
Process deliverable:
1. Impact & Complexity score of the Projects

2. Project methodology identification (JDI/KKD/BPS/APS/DD)
Key Differentiators
# Criteria JDI KKD BPS APS Deep Dive
To address next higher level of To address next higher level To address next higher level of
To address highest level of
complexity issues compared to of complexity issues complexity & impact issues
To address ‘surface level’ complexity & impact issues,
JDI, which are small, easy, compared to KKD, where compared to BPS, where
problems within the where Problems are identified
quick to solve within process Problems are identified from Problems are identified from
process owner span of from PM, KRA Gaps, Customer
owner span of control where Gemba, DWM, PM from a Gemba, DWM, PM, KRA Gaps,
Definition control which are basic, complaints, Field issues,
the root cause/s are known, process, scope within span of Internal customer complaints,
small, easy, quick to solve, Warranty failures which requires
but solution/s are not sure, control of project leader done Field issues, Warranty failures
where root cause/s & complex data collection and
hence may require moderate along with CFT which requires which requires higher level of
solution/s are both known. analysis using advanced
level of analysis for solution moderate level of data data collection and analysis
statistical tools
identification collection & analysis using statistical tools
Training
1 0.5 days 0.5 days 2 days 6 days 10 days
Duration
Statistical tools (Test of Advanced Statistical tools
Basic Statistical Tools
2 Analysis Tools Nil Nil Hypothesis, Regression, full (Fractional factorial DOE,
(Seven QC tools)
factorial DOE etc.) ANOVA,VSM,GLM etc.)
Daily Management +
3 Project Source Daily Management Daily Management Daily Management Policy Management
Policy management
Project Complexity - High Complexity – Very High
4 Complexity - Low Complexity – Low Complexity – Moderate
Classification Impact- High Impact - High
Applicable to all levels, with Applicable to all levels, with
5 Target group Applicable to all levels Applicable to all levels more focus on Gemba/ more focus on Gemba/front Applicable to managerial level
frontline engineers line /managerial level
6 Methodology Not applicable 4 Steps 7 Steps 7 Steps 7 Steps
CFT & Data
7 Not compulsory Not compulsory Compulsory Compulsory Compulsory
collection
Standard Within 7 days
8 Within 30 days (Part-time) Within 90 days (Part-time) Within 180 days (Part-time) Within 180 days (Full-time)
timelines (Part-time)
Completion
9 Department Head Department Head MBB + Sponsor MBB + Department Head MBB + CQ Head + Vertical Head
Approval By
Advance Problem Solving
Basic Problem Solving Green Belt certification after 2
Program
10 Nil Nil program completion projects completion and Black Belt
Certification
certification successfully clearing written
exam
11 Annexure No 5 6 7 8
3. Training Identification & Delivery
Issue No: 3
Page : 18 of 72
3.0 Training Identification & Delivery
Objective: To provide appropriate problem solving training to management staff as per the
standard ALPS problem solving curriculum designed by AL Central quality team depending
on business needs
In scope: Applicable to all executives nominated for the respective PS training
Process Flow: As described below for BPS, APS, Deep dive projects Fig 3.1, JDI/KKD project
identification is in Fig 3.2, Champions Training Fig 3.3, Refresher capsule training Fig 3.4,
refer annexure 2 for training preparation checklist
Start
Project identification
by Sponsor/HOD
LSS BB seek support of plant

management to meet training norms
No, not meeting norms

Assessment
of training
readiness
Yes, meeting norms
Project charter approval by Sponsor
C
Issue No: 3
Page : 19 of 72
Training nomination invitation by Plant function

/ Corporate function head
Training delivery as per ALPS curriculum for the

respective methodologies
Training effectiveness evaluation by HR
End
Fig 3.1
Issue No: 3
Page : 20 of 72
Start
Gemba visit/Issues
highlighted by Customers
Project identified by first line

supervisors/Engineers
Actions initiation & implementation

as per decided time line
No, not meeting norms

Check for
Sustenance of
actions
Yes, meeting norms
Fill format as par JDI/KKD and submit

to Coordinator
End
Fig 3.2
Issue No: 3
Page : 21 of 72
Start
Candidates’ identification completion by PH
Formal announcement by HR with training

dates & venue
Training delivery as per ALPS champion

curriculum
Projects delivery target finalization for FY
End
Fig 3.3
Issue No: 3
Page : 22 of 72
Start
Candidate’s identification by PH/Corp FH/Top Mgmt
Formal training announcement by HR with

Training dates & Venue
Training delivery as per ALPS curriculum
End
Fig 3.4
Pre & Post Training Evaluation:
1. BPS Pre & Post Test

2. APS Part 1 Pre & Post Test
3. APS Part 2 Pre & Post Test
Process Responsibility: Plant Function or Corporate Function Head, Head - HR, LSS BB, LSS
MBB
Process Ownership: PH, Plant or Function LSS BB, HR
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head / Corporate Function Head, Head – HR,
LSS BB, Project Leaders, MBB & Head - LSS
1. Training feedback score Pre & Post training effectiveness score

4. Project Registration
Issue No: 3
Page : 24 of 72
4.0 Project Registration
Objective: To register the Problem Solving projects with a unique project identification
number in the PS project bucket for reviewing, monitoring & support
In scope: Applicable to all executives undergoing PS projects
Process Flow: As described below, for BPS, APS, Deep Dive ref fig 4.1, for JDI / KKD refer fig
4.2
Start
Approved projects allotted unique project ID

by LSS BB
Unique project ID updated in PS database
Unique project ID communication sent to

Project leader & Sponsor
End
Fig 4.1
Issue No: 3
Page : 25 of 72
Start
Approved projects allotted unique project ID

by HOD
Unique project ID updated in the department

register
Unique project ID communication sent to

Project leader
End
Fig 4.2
Project ID nomenclature: Problem Solving Category (3 letters in capital)/Plant or Function (3

letters in capital)/Year of Project start/3 digit unique identification continuous serial number
Examples:
1. JDI or KKD / Dept./ Function/ Area/ Year/ Sl no - JDI/QE/LCV/EOL/14-15/005

2. BPS/ENR/2014/057, APS/PNR/2015/004, BPS/COR/2015/007
3. Deep Dive Project – DD/ENR/2016/001
Issue No: 3
Page : 26 of 72
Project duration standard: As per project charter timelines
Process Responsibility: Sponsor, LSS BB
Process Ownership: LSS BB, LSS MBB
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head, Black Belt, Project Leaders, MBB,
External Consultant
Process Deliverable:
1. Allocation of unique project code

2. Charter finalization & approval by Sponsor
5. Problem Solving Projects Review
Issue No: 3
Page : 28 of 72
5.0 Problem Solving Projects Review
Objective: To ensure adherence of structured Problem Solving (PS) approach, application of

relevant tools for decision making, and support to achieve desired project objectives as per
planned timelines in project charter
In Scope: Applicable to all executives undergoing PS projects
Process Flow: As described below for BPS, APS in Fig 5.1, for Deep Dive in Fig 5.2
Start
Project progress by Project CFT
Progress not as per plan
Project
Project review Project support
review by LSS
by LSS BB with taken with CFT, BB, BB with
Sponsor/HOD Sponsor, HOD Sponsor/HOD
Cannot
be
Progress as per Plan revived
Can be revived
Project
short
Refinements required
closure
Project review
by LSS MBB /
PH
No refinement required
End
E
Issue No: 3
Page : 29 of 72
Plan & stipulate timeline for closure
Continuous monitoring & review by

BB/MBB till readiness for closure
End
Fig 5.1
Issue No: 3
Page : 30 of 72
Start
Project progress by Project CFT
Progress not as per plan
Project
Project review Project support
review by LSS
by LSS BB with taken with CFT, BB, BB with
Sponsor Sponsor, HOD Sponsor
Cannot
be
Progress as per Plan revived
Can be revived
Project
short
Refinements required
closure
Project review by
LSS MBB ,Vertical
Head & CQ Head
End
Project closed
Fig 5.2
Issue No: 3
Page : 31 of 72
Project Duration standard: Within 3 months from Project Start Date (PSD) for BPS projects,
Within 6 Months from PSD for APS/BB/Deep Dive Projects. Process Review Timelines:
Who / Review
Role
Reviewer Frequency
Review project progress w.r.t plan, conducts project
Atleast
LSS BB tollgate reviews, checks for correct application of 7 step
Fortnightly
PS methodology & complex statistical tools
Review project trend, technical direction & support
Atleast
Sponsor requirements for carrying out improvements to meet
Fortnightly
project charter target
Steers PS journey in the organization, build BB capability
Interim review and approves project for closure during Atleast
MBB
closure review, validates correct application of seven Monthly
step PS methodology & complex statistical tools
Reviews with BB for the overall status of PS deployment,
HOD/PH/Top reviews individual projects on need basis, Intervenes Atleast
Management wherever required, Reward & Recognize outstanding Monthly
project work
Tollgate Reviews:
1. BPS tollgate review checklist – Refer annexure no 3

2. APS/Deep Dive tollgate review checklist – Refer annexure no 4
Process Responsibility: LSS BB, LSS MBB, Sponsor, HOD, PH
Process Ownership: LSS BB, LSS MBB
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head, LSS BB, Project Leaders & LSS MBB.
1. Proper adherence of PS approach

2. Application of relevant PS tools
3. Periodic MIS reporting of RYG status to management
6. PS Project Financial savings quantification & vetting
Issue No: 3
Page : 33 of 72
6.0 PS Project Financial savings quantification & vetting
Objective: To get PS project financial savings vetted by Finance to enable authorization for
formal project closure & declaration to the top management
In Scope: Applicable to all completed PS Projects
Process Flow: As described below for JDI, KKD, BPS, APS, Deep Dive in Fig 6.1
Start
Finance vetting document submission in the

standard JDI/KKD/PS finance vetting template
Initial review Refinements required
by Finance
executive
Authorization
review by
Head - Finance
F
Issue No: 3
Page : 34 of 72
Cost savings vetting completion & hand over to Project team
Submission of finance vetted copy to LSS team &

Inclusion in the PS project documentation
End
Fig 6.1
PS Finance Vetting Template: Refer annexure no 9
PS Finance Vetting Guidelines:
# Project Category Guidelines SAP/Reports

Tool & Consumable 12 digit code print screen with cost & usage (cost MB 51 & 52
1
cost reduction center wise) (NTS1/ NCS1)
Quality improvement SAP screen shot with material code, along with
2 ZQMREJ etc
projects Metric improvement trend as on date
Manufacturing services team signature on the Electrical
Energy conservation
3 data, positive impact on the Shop (Trend graph Monthly
improvement projects
to be added) Energy report
Capacity vs Actual - Improvement trend, Screen
Productivity Production
4 shots - Before Vs After from computer screen
improvement Report
from Machine (output )
5 Inventory reduction As per Finance records MCBE / MC.9
Warranty cost SAP screen shot with material code, Metric ZSDRW001 &
6
reduction improvement trend updated with matured data ZSDRW002
Issue No: 3
Page : 35 of 72
Process Responsibility: Project Leaders
Process Ownership: Project Leader & Sponsor
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, Plant Head, Black Belt, Project Leaders, MBB, Financial
Controller, HODs, Steering committee, VP, Head CQ, President – Operations.
1. Financial benefits vetted by Head-Finance

2. Savings Projection to LSS Team based on the next 12 months order volumes.
7. Project closure review
Issue No: 3
Page : 37 of 72
7.0 Project closure review
Objective: To ensure that the closure requirements of the PS project is met as per the ALPS
closure standards
In Scope: Applicable to all executives undergoing BPS, APS, Deep Dive projects
Out of Scope: JDI & KKD Projects
Process Flow: As described below in Fig 7.1
Start
Project closure approval by Sponsor with Finance vetting
Project submission for closure review by Project leader
G H
Issue No: 3
Page : 38 of 72
G H
Pre closure Refinements required

review by LSS BB
with Sponsor
Final closure review Refinements required

by MBB with Sponsor
/HOD/Vertical
Head/CQ Head
Project closure authorization
End
Fig 7.1
Project Closure norms:
1. Project benefits reached as per PS project charter

2. Relevant and correct application of PS tools
3. Project documentation completed on all aspects incl finance vetting if applicable
Issue No: 3
Page : 39 of 72
Process Responsibility: Sponsor, Project Leader
Process Ownership: Sponsor, Project Leader, BB
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head, Black Belt, Project Leaders, MBB,
Vertical Head, CQ Head.
1. Project closure declaration

8. Problem Solving Certification
Issue No: 3
Page : 41 of 72
8.0 Problem Solving Certification
Objective: To award PS certificates to executives complying with the ALPS certification

norms prescribed by AL Central Quality team
In scope: Applicable to all PS trained executives who have completed BPS, APS & Deep Dive
projects
Out of Scope: Executives who have completed JDI, KKD projects
Process Flow: As described below for BPS, APS & Deep Dive training completion in Fig 8.1,
APS & Deep Dive Certification in Fig 8.2
Start
Candidates for certification identified based

on ALPS closure norms
Formal invitations sent to Project leaders,

sponsors, HOD, PH & other invitees
Certification ceremony completion
Helpdesk communication sent
End
Fig 8.1
Issue No: 3
Page : 42 of 72
Start
Candidates’ identification for GB/DD exam

based on ALPS certification norms
Communication of exam date & venue to

candidates, sponsors & top management
Unsuccessful
Conduct of
Mentoring to
Written Exam
candidates
by ALCQ
Successful
Certification as per ALPS norms
End
Fig 8.2
Project Closure norms:
1. Project PPT completion in all aspects;

2. Finance vetting (if applicable) completed;
3. Sponsor approval for closure;
4. BB closure review;
5. MBB / External consultant closure review
Issue No: 3
Page : 43 of 72
BPS Program :
`
Issue No: 3
Page : 44 of 72

APS Program :
Deep Dive Program :

Issue No: 3
Page : 45 of 72

Deep Dive Certifications
ALPS Certification Policy URL :
http://alportal/sites/AL/Document%20Library/1/CORPORATE/GB%20Certification%20Process.pdf
Process Responsibility: BB
Process Ownership: BB, MBB
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head, BB, Project Leaders, MBB, Top
Management
1. Problem Solving competency enhancement of executives

2. Awarding certification to the executives who demonstrate competency as per PS
policy norms
9. MIS Reporting
Issue No: 3
Page : 47 of 72
9.0 MIS reporting
Objective: To submit PS MIS reports (Plan Vs Actuals) to management for information &
necessary action wherever required as per management guidelines
In Scope: Applicable to all PS projects
MIS Reports:
1. Plant LSS dashboard

2. PS MIS to Sponsors/HOD’s/PH
Process flow: As given below, refer fig 9.1 below
Start
Collation of Project status by BB/ Coordinator / TQM Coordinator
MIS reporting to management
End
Process Ownership: BB for BPS, APS, Deep Dive projects, CQ TQM for JDI and KKD
Stakeholders Involved: BB, Coordinator, HODs, Sponsors, PH, MBB, Top management,
Process deliverable :
1. On time & Accurate report submission

10. Sustenance Audit & Monitoring
Issue No: 3
Page : 49 of 72
10.0 Sustenance Audit & Monitoring
Objective: To check the sustenance status of completed projects for specific time period and
report to management
In scope: Applicable to all closed BPS, APS & Deep dive projects
Not clear: JDI, KKD projects
Frequency: Quarterly
Criteria for Audit:
1. Closed BPS Projects for subsequent 6 months from project closure month
2. Closed APS, Deep dive projects for subsequent 12 months from project closure
month
Process Flow: As given in Fig 10.1 below
Start
PH assigns internal resource for sustenance audit
Projects due for Sustenance audit planned &

Compiled by BB
Planned projects for audit are sent to the

nominated internal resource
I
Issue No: 3
Page : 50 of 72
10.0 Sustenance Audit & Monitoring
Not sustained
Conduct
of Audits
Cases reported to BB
Sustained
MIS to BB BB reviews case with Sponsor

& finalizes action plan
Consolidated MIS to PH
End
Fig 10.1
Process Responsibility: BB, PH
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, HODs, Plant Head, BB, MBB, Top management
1. To capture sustenance status of all closed projects

2. To provide timely MIS report to management on sustenance status
11. Annual Competition with R&R
Issue No: 3
Page : 52 of 72
11.0 Annual Competition with Reward & Recognition (R&R)
Objective: To reward & recognize the effort of teams/ individuals for outstanding LSS/PS
project work completion and to further spread the culture of excellence
Scope: Applicable to all executives for closed BPS, APS & Deep Dive projects as per the
specified time period of the competition
Details & Categories of competition : Leadership Excellence Awards for Problem Solving
(LEAPS)
Process Flow: As given in Fig 11.1 below

Issue No: 3
Page : 53 of 72
11.0 Annual Competition with R&R
Start
Announcement of competition criteria through HD
Jury finalization with PH
First cut shortlisting Not meeting norms

of projects by BB as
per pre-defined Not considered further
criteria for cat 1 & 2
Meeting norms
Communication of shortlisted projects to

project leaders along with date & venue
Not meeting norms

Conduct of
competition for Not considered further
category 1 & 2
Meeting norms
J
Issue No: 3
Page : 54 of 72
11.0 Annual Competition with R&R
Jury & PH consensus meeting
Winners’ results announced through Help Desk
Prize distribution by top management
End
Process Responsibility: BB, Unit HR, PH
Stakeholders Involved: Sponsors, Plant Head, BB, Project Leaders, MBB, HODs, other
invitees, Top Management
1. Timely process completion

2. Timely communication to the plant/organization
12. PS Deployment Stakeholders – Roles & Responsibilities
Issue No: 3
Page : 56 of 72
12.0 PS Deployment Stakeholders – Roles & Responsibilities
Objective: To provide clarity to all stake holders involved in Problem Solving deployment in
plant or function
Scope: Applicable to all stakeholders involved in PS deployment in plant/function
LSS Deployment Organization Structure:
Plant Function/
Corporate Function
Champion
Master Black
HODs Finance Head
Belt
Black Belt Sponsors
Project Leaders
Project CFT
members
PS Deployment Stakeholders:
1. Project Leader (Green Belt or Black Belt)

2. Project Mentor (Black Belt or Master Black Belt)
3. Project Sponsor (Reporting Manager/HOD)
4. Project Team Members
5. Plant or Function Champion (Plant or Function Head)
6. PS Coordinator (Black Belt/Gemba)
Issue No: 3
Page : 57 of 72
7. Financial Controller – Head – Finance

8. Human Resource custodian – Head – HR
9. Management Representative – MR of TS, EMS, OSHAS etc
Roles & Responsibility:
1. Project Leader (Yellow/Green Belt):
a. Works part-time on the project.

b. Oversees the project & provides direction and allocates assignments to CFT
members.
c. Liaison with management & stake holders, especially sponsors & function head for
resolution of bottlenecks.
d. Assess team progress to plan, evaluate and initiate corrective action wherever
required.
e. Attend project CFT meeting and contribute to the project in every possible manner.
2. Project Facilitator (Black Belt):
a. Works full-time on the project.

b. Oversees the project & provides direction and splits assignments to CFT members
c. Liaison with management & multiple stake holders, especially sponsors & other
function head’s for resolution of bottlenecks.
d. Assess team progress to plan, evaluate and initiate corrective action wherever
required.
e. Attend project CFT meeting and contribute to the project in every possible manner.
3. Project Sponsor:
a. Ownership of the project.

b. Identification of PS projects with strong linkage to CP metrics.
c. Releasing project leaders for project work, either as full-time or part-time depending
on the business requirement.
Issue No: 3
Page : 58 of 72
d. Accountable for the outcome of the project.

e. Drive by providing necessary resources, budgetary approvals, team members’ time,
mobilize support from other functions for the project.
f. Status reporting of PS projects in HOD/Plant Head review along with action plan
formulation for deviations if any
g. Counseling & motivation of project team leader & members.
h. Conduct periodic reviews with project leader & CFT and provide necessary direction
and suggest course correction wherever required
i. Reward & Recognize the belts & team members on successful completion of the
project
4. Project Team members:
a. Supports project leader by on time completion of assigned tasks.

b. Supports project leader with new idea generation.
c. Supports project leader by participating in BB, Sponsor & Plant head reviews.
d. Supports other team members depending on the need during the course of the
project
5. Plant Champion:
a. Spearhead the PS journey in the plant/function.

b. Periodic at least monthly review of the ongoing PS projects with Sponsors, Project
leaders & CFT members.
c. Financial approvals related to new investment, trials, Reward & Recognition of the
projects.
d. Provide necessary resources to de-bottleneck & expedite project improvement
actions,
e. Devise strategy & overall drive to continually improve the current level of
performance on PS project closures & savings.
Issue No: 3
Page : 59 of 72
f. Chair important PS events in the plant and reinforce management commitment to

continuous improvement through PS
g. Drive a culture of continuous improvement through PS approach in the
plant/function.
6. Plant Coordinator (Black Belt/Gemba):
a. Track the overall PS objectives of the plant and report to the management
periodically;
b. Monthly MIS reporting of all PS projects to MBB, PH, Sponsors, with the overall big
picture of PS deployment in the plant/function;
c. Act as an enabler for the business by identification of right PS projects to achieve
plant/function business goals;
d. Enable project selection discussions with steering committee, sponsors & PH, to
ensure the right key pain areas are selected as PS projects;
e. Initiate & enable interim and closure project reviews with Sponsor, PH, MBB
periodically to achieve the project closure & savings target;
f. Conduct PS trainings for creation of new belts & refresher trainings periodically to
sustain the PS momentum in the plant/function;
g. Support project leaders with the deployment of relevant PS tools for the project to
enable achieve the desired objectives;
h. Spearhead & drive important PS events & competitions in the plant/function;
highlight, reward & recognize key PS achievement in the plant;
i. Communicate and share success stories of key PS project achievements & closures
with all stakeholders to continually improve the motivation & ownership levels.
7. Steering Committee:
a. Participate in identifying key improvement projects aligned to the Plant function or

Corporate function CP metrics which require resolution through PS approach;
b. Review shortlisted PS project for its readiness for external competition or key
stakeholder review;
Issue No: 3
Page : 60 of 72
c. Engage in PS annual competitions and provide stimulus to the PS culture &

movement;
8. Financial Controller:
a. Approve the pre-project financial savings during the Problem Identification phase of
the PS project;
b. Review financial benefits & validate savings of the PS project as part of control
phase;
c. Scrutinize & provide on time financial approvals related to overall new investment as
part of the project, project trials, Reward & Recognition schemes related to ensure
steady progress in the overall PS deployment in the plant/function.
9. Human Resource custodian (Head – HR):
d. Supports PS training plan with the necessary training infrastructure to meet PS

training target;
e. Drive the project leader selection process in coordination with other key
stakeholders including Sponsors, HOD, PH to ensure strengthening of future
leadership pipeline & succession planning;
f. Ensure PMS processes are aligned for better reward & recognition to project leaders,
CFT members, Sponsors;
g. Ensure Total Employee Involvement (TEI) & employee engagement in continuous
improvement through PS approach.
Acronyms & Annexures used
With Templates
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 62 of 72
Acronyms Used
No Acronym Expansion
1 AGM Assistant General Manager
2 AL Ashok Leyland
3 APS Advanced Problem Solving
4 BB Black Belt
5 BPS Basic Problem Solving
6 CFO Chief Financial Officer
7 CFT Cross Functional Team
8 CP Corporate Plan
9 CQ Central Quality
10 DD Deep Dive
11 DGM Deputy General Manager
12 EMS Environment Management System
13 FH Functional Head
14 GB Green Belt
15 GM General Manager
16 HD Help Desk
17 HoD Head of Department
18 HR Human Resources
19 JDI Just Do It
20 KKD Keiken Kan Dokyo (Experience Intuition Guts)
21 LSS Lean Six Sigma
22 MBB Master Black Belt
23 MD Managing Director
24 MIS Management Information Systems
25 OSHAS Occupational Health and Safety Advisory Services
26 PH Plant Head
27 PMS Performance Management System
28 PPT Power Point presentation
29 PS Problem Solving
30 PSD Project Start Date
31 R&R Reward & Recognition
32 RYG Red Yellow Green
33 SVP Senior Vice President
34 TEI Total Employee Involvement
35 TQM Total Quality Management
36 TS Technical Specification
37 VP Vice President
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 63 of 72
Annexures List & Sample
Process Process Annexure Annexure

# Details
No Page No No Page No
1 1 11 1 64 Project Identification Matrix
2 2 22 2 65 Training Preparation Checklist
3 4 32 3 66 BPS Tollgate Review Checklist
APS/Deep Dive
4 4 32 4 67
Tollgate Review Checklist
5 3 27 5 68 JDI Template
6 3 37 6 69 KKD Template
7 6 40 7 70 BPS A3
8 6 40 8 71 APS A3
9 6 29 9 72 PS Finance Vetting Template

Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 64 of 72
Annexure no 1
Selection grid - Problem solving methodology
Complexity Score Assessment

S.No. Complexity Driver Weightage
(1,3,9) 1 3 9
Regularly / Perennial
Sporadically / Irregular
C1 Frequency of the problem 15 9 Rarely (occuring at regular
(occuring at irregular intervals)
intervals)
Multiple processes in Single Multiple plants / Multiple
C2 Scope at process level 15 3 Single process
plant / Single Location Locations
Selective models (within Across segment & across

C3 Scope at product level 15 3 Single model
segment) models (as applicable)
Degree of process
C4 15 3 Manual Semi or Partially mechanized Fully mechanized
mechanization
Potential causes known based Potential causes not

Knowledge about root cause & All Root causes known;
C5 15 3 on past experience / gut feel, yet known, data collection and
solutions Solution also known
to be validated with data analysis required
Policy management at
Daily work Policy management at
C6 Source of the project 25 1 Function or Plant or
management Department level
Corporate level
Complexity Score 38%
Impact Score Assessment

S.No. Impact Driver Weightage
(1,3,9) 1 3 9
Financial savings (or)

I1 Opportunity loss (in case of non 20 3 < 3.0 Lakhs 3 - 10 Lakhs > 10 Lakhs
cost reduction/non-mfg projects)
Direct impact on Internal

Indirect impact on the Direct impact on End
I2 Impact on customer 20 9 Customer; Indirect impact on
internal customer customer
End Customer
Impact on process/ Shop / Department Plant function / Corporate Business / Company level
I3 20 3
business/stakeholder level metrics function level metrics metrics
I4 Gap between target and actual 20 3 Less than 25% Between 25% to 50% Greater than 50%
Across AL / More than one

I5 Horizontal deployment 20 3 No direct opportunity Atleast one direct opportunity
direct opportunity
Impact score 47%

Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 65 of 72
Annexure no 2 – APS Training Checklist
Time & Action calendar - PS GB Training Part 1 Ennore - 07th Jun to 09th Jun 2015 5-Jun-15
S.No Activity Responsibility Cut off RYG Status Deadline Actuals Remarks
1 APS big banner finalization Saravana 45 Completed 21-Apr 21-Apr -
2 APS small banner content finalization Saravana 45 Completed 21-Apr 21-Apr -
3 Banner ordering - Required nos Saravana 40 Completed 26-Apr 26-Apr -
Pre-Training -
4 Date finalization with Plant Head Raj 38 Completed 28-Apr 28-Apr -
5 Consultant availability - finalization Sachin 36 Completed 30-Apr 30-Apr -
6 Venue availability - finalization Saravana 34 Completed 2-May 2-May -
7 Mail from PH seeking projects & candidates nominations for LSS Training Raj 33 Completed 3-May 3-May -
8 Seek Travel plan from Hemant Sachin 32 Completed 4-May 4-May -
9 Mail to ALIMS for PC approval with Minitab 16.0 installation Saravana 28 Completed 8-May 8-May -
10 Seek asset id's from Helpdesk Saravana 27 Completed 9-May 9-May -

11 Air ticket booking for Hemant & co for to & fro Sachin 26 Completed 10-May 10-May -
12 Hotel booking for Hemant & co Sachin 26 Completed 10-May 10-May -
13 Car booking for Hemant & Co Sachin 26 Completed 10-May 10-May -
14 Problem bank list updation discussion with Sponsors/Shop Heads Raj 25 Completed 11-May 11-May -
15 Potential candidates finalisation discussion with Sponsors/Shop Heads Raj 25 Inprogress 11-May 11-May -
16 Check for any changes in GB training material with Sachin Raj 24 Completed 12-May 12-May -
17 Check for any changes in Champion material with Sachin Raj 24 NA 12-May 12-May -
18 Check for any changes in minitab exercises files with Sachin Raj 24 NA 12-May 12-May -
19 GB Training material support kits - Ordering (notebook, pen, stickers) & receipt status Saravana 22 Completed 14-May 14-May -
20 Raise e-form based on asset id receipt and minitab 16.0 installation Saravana 21 Completed 15-May 15-May -
21 GB Training material part 1 & 2 ordering, as applicable Saravana 20 Completed 16-May 16-May -
22 Training kit transportation to ALCOB including catapult Sreedhar/Saravana 19 Completed 17-May 17-May -
23 Projects finalization with LSS Steering Committee Raj 18 Completed 18-May 18-May -
24 Participants finalization with Sponsors, Shop Heads Raj 18 Completed 18-May 18-May -
25 Projects finalization with PH Raj 17 Completed 19-May 19-May -
26 Project Charter readiness of all participants Raj 15 Completed 21-May 21-May -
27 Mail from PH to all GB's for GB Training Raj 14 Completed 22-May 22-May -
28 GB Material Collection from ALCOB (Cab booking to be done) Raj 14 NA 22-May 22-May -
29 Pre-Training session by BB to all participants, along with Training material distribution Raj 13 Completed 23-May 23-May -
30 GB Material distribution to all GB's Raj 13 NA 23-May 23-May -
31 Consultant interim/final closure review schedule - Tentative dates - mail circulation Raj 12 Completed 24-May 24-May -
32 Photo arrangement (Internal) Saravana 11 Completed 25-May 25-May -
33 Provide Minitab supporting files to helpdesk Saravana 10 Completed 26-May 26-May -
34 Mail to participants about training with dates, breaktimings emphasizing on shift planningRaj
accordingly 8 Completed 28-May 28-May -
35 Mail to GB's for Interim Review by Hemant Raj 7 Completed 29-May 29-May -
36 Training Conference room - IT Readiness (Projector+Minitab 16.0+Supporting files) Saravana 7 Completed 29-May 29-May -
a Projector
b Minitab
c Minitab supporting files
d LAN Connectivity
e Collar mike
c Uploading minitab supporting files in all the systems
37 Training Room Arrangement - Saravana 7 Completed 29-May 29-May -
a Check for room cleanliness - Estate maintenance
b Check for power junction box working - Electrical
c Check for A/c working- Electrical
f Check for room lighting- Electrical
g Check for boards - Office Service
h Drinking water bottles - Admin off boy
i Check for chairs condition- Office service
j Board marker pens - Office service
k Spare batteries - AA, AAA - Self
38 Seek Cab approval if required for things shifting from ALCOB Raj 6 NA 30-May 30-May -
39 Agenda finalization with timing, faculty details etc Raj 6 Completed 30-May 30-May -
40 Send mail to other plant BB's for Interim review slots Raj 6 Completed 30-May 30-May -
41 Training exercises finalization with Consultant Raj 5 Completed 31-May 31-May -
42 New Training exercises - Procurement (If any) Raj 4 Completed 1-Jun 1-Jun -
43 Quiz paper Part 1 - readiness Raj 4 Completed 1-Jun 1-Jun -
44 Agenda print outs for participants Raj 3 NA 2-Jun 2-Jun -
45 Check with hemant on the available time slots for interim review day wise Raj 3 Completed 2-Jun 2-Jun -
46 Training kit transportation to ENR including catapult Raj 2 NA 3-Jun 3-Jun -
47 Lunch, Snacks with Cups arrangement with Timing - Communication to Canteen, HR Saravana 2 Completed 3-Jun 3-Jun -
48 Communication to Security about the program Saravana 2 NA 3-Jun 3-Jun -
49 Mail to helpdesk for additional IT support on Day 1 Saravana 2 Completed 3-Jun 3-Jun -
50 Banner location - finalization Saravana 2 Completed 3-Jun 3-Jun -
51 Group photo location - Finalization Saravana 1 Completed 4-Jun 4-Jun -
52 Reminders to PH, Invitees - a day or two before training commencement Raj 1 Completed 4-Jun 4-Jun -
53 Reminders to canteen Saravana 1 Completed 4-Jun 4-Jun -
54 Reminders to participants Raj 1 Completed 4-Jun 4-Jun -
55 Attendance sheet - readiness Saravana 1 Completed 4-Jun 4-Jun -
56 Training accessories receipt & readiness at venue Saravana 0 Completed 5-Jun 5-Jun -
57 Day wise attendance circulation to Top management - Day 1 Raj 0 Completed 5-Jun 5-Jun -
58 Day wise attendance circulation to Top management - Day 2 Raj -1 6-Jun 6-Jun -
59 Day wise attendance circulation to Top management - Day 3 Raj -2 7-Jun 7-Jun -
60 Feedback form - readiness Raj -2 Completed 7-Jun 7-Jun -
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 66 of 72
Annexure no 3 – BPS Tollgate review checklist
Problem Definition Phase Checklist
# Check points
1 Project adequately defined and has strong linkage to the company improvement objectives and goals
2 Scope of the project is defined adequately. It is neither too big nor too small.
3 Project Charter - Measure(s) and benefits are quantified, Timelines clearly defined
4 Financial savings appropriate as per company guidelines for BB/GB
Targets are set with improvement of about 70% over current performance or adequate difficulty level but is
5
achievable or suitable benchmarking done to fix targets
6 Is the project approved by Sponsor and/or Champion, Financial controller as applicable?
7 CFT members are appropriate and committed for the time
8 Is the approved project charter shared with CFT and their reporting managers by Sponsor
Belt trained (or under training). He/she possess appropriate understanding of capability to understand the
9
process to be improved.
10 Field visit & CFT review plan completed
11 Voice of Customer collected
Observation Phase Checklist
# Check points
1 Gemba visit & Problem redefinition completed
2 Process flow diagram are completed with Xs and Ys identified
3 Field visits & CFT reviews undertaken as per plan
4 Awareness creation initiatives undertaken
5 Check sheet completed
6 Baseline establised using control charts
Data collection plan for X's formulated / New data collection processes introduced / Automated (if past data
7
not available/reliable)
Analysis Phase Checklist
# Check points
1 Data collection & Stratification completed
2 CFT meetings as per plan
3 Fish bone / affinity / tree diagram / Why-Why analysis completed
4 The relationship of Xs and Ys is validated using QC tools
5 Root cause/s identified
6 Project metric trend is continuously monitored as per planned frequency
7 Project metric trend is shared with CFT regularly and updated in Gemba
Action Phase Checklist
# Check points
1 Solution Selection completed
2 Risk analysis completed
3 Cost/benefit analysis of optimal solution(s).
4 New and improved process ('should be') maps developed.
5 Small-scale pilot for proposed improvement(s).
6 Pilot data collected and analyzed suing Q7 tools - Before Vs After
7 Improved process ('should be') maps modified based on pilot data and analysis.
Solution implementation plan established, including schedule/work breakdown structure, resources, risk
8
management plan, cost/budget, and control plan. Contingency plan established.
Check Phase Checklist
# Check points
1 Pareto - Before Vs After to be completed
2 Control charts - Before Vs After (full scale implementation)
3 Histogram - Before Vs After
Standardize phase Checklist
# Check points
1 SOP/WI completed
New process steps, standards, and documentation are integrated into quality, enviroment, safety system
2
documentation
Operating procedures are consistent. Knowledge gained on process is shared and institutionalized (hor
3
deployment).
4 Mistake proofing, automation as applicable completed
5 Response plans established, understood, and deployed.
6 Sustenance audit/monitoring plan - established
(Project Closure) Transfer ownership and knowledge to process owner and process team tasked with the
7
responsibilities.
Conclude phase Checklist
# Check points
1 VOC - After improvement obtained
2 Sponsor/PH feedback obtained
3 Financial savings vetted
4 Way forward - Future improvement projects related to project scope/actions identified
5 Lessons learnt, Acknowledgements, Tools used - completed
6 One page Executive summary - completed
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 67 of 72
Annexure no 4 – APS Tollgate review checklist
Problem Definition Phase Checklist

# Check points
1 Project adequately defined and has strong linkage to the company improvement objectives and goals
2 Scope of the project is defined adequately. It is neither too big nor too small.
3 Project Charter - Measure(s) and benefits are quantified, Timelines clearly defined.
4 Financial savings appropriate as per company guidelines for BB/GB
Targets are set with improvement of about 70% over current performance or adequate difficulty level but is achievable or suitable
5
benchmarking done to fix targets
6 Is the project approved by Sponsor and/or Champion, Financial controller as applicable?
7 CFT members are appropriate and committed for the time
8 Is the approved project charter shared with CFT and their reporting managers by Sponsor
9 Belt trained (or under training). He/she possess appropriate understanding of capability to understand the process to be improved.
10 Field visit & CFT review plan completed
11 Voice of Customer collected
Observation Phase Checklist

# Check points
1 Gemba visit & Problem redefinition completed
2 Process flow diagram & Process Map are completed with Xs and Ys identified
3 Field visits & CFT reviews undertaken as per plan
4 Lean process map / Value Stream Map (VSM) is completed if applicable (for lean projects)
5 Measurement Systems Analysis is complete and meets the norms.
6 Normality Test / Run chart / Control chart used to check for Normality & Process Stability
7 Initial Process Capability is evaluated to understand gap between desired and actual results
8 Baseline establised
9 Cause and Effects Matrix is completed and KPIVs are ranked by importance
10 Data collection plan for X's formulated / New data collection processes introduced / automated (if past data not available/reliable)
Analysis Phase Checklist

# Check points
1 FMEA is complete and actions are identified with responsibilities and dates
2 List of possible causes is generated and stratified based on Exploratory Data Analysis, Multivari studies
3 The relationship of Xs and Ys is validated using Hypothesis tests, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and/or regression
4 Prioritized list of 'vital few' KPIVs (key sources of variation) is available
5 Waste/ VA NVA Analysis is complete in case of purely lean projects
6 Field visit / Failure investigation completed as per plan
7 Root cause/s identified
8 Project metric trend is continuously monitored as per planned frequency and shared with CFT regularly
Action Phase Checklist

# Check points
Possible solutions generated and tested using appropriate tools such as Design of Experiments, Evolutionary Operation, Response
1
Surface Methods
2 Optimal solution selected based on testing and analysis.
3 Solution is validated statistically using appropriate hypothesis tests and/or ANOVA
4 New and improved process ('should be') maps developed.
5 Value Stream Map of improved process is completed in case of purely Lean projects
6 Cost/benefit analysis of optimal solution(s).
7 Small-scale pilot for proposed improvement(s).
8 Pilot data collected and analyzed - Before Vs After
9 Improved process ('should be') maps modified based on pilot data and analysis.
Solution implementation plan established, including schedule/work breakdown structure, resources, risk management plan,
10
cost/budget, and control plan. Contingency plan established.
Check Phase Checklist

# Check points
1 Cp, Cpk - Before Vs After to be completed
2 Check effectiveness of Improvement for each Corrective action, including field visit wherever applicable to collect feedback
3 Control charts - Before Vs After (full scale implementation)
4 Hypothesis test - Before Vs After
5 Future state VSM
6 MSA reanalysis
Standardize phase Checklist

# Check points
1 FMEA, Control plan, Audit plan, Training plan, Daily Work Management in place for sustaining improvements (short and long-term).
2 New process steps, standards, and documentation are integrated into quality, enviroment, safety system documentation.
3 Operating procedures are consistent. Knowledge gained on process is shared and institutionalized (horizontal deployment).
4 Mistake proofing, design change, automation as applicable completed.
5 Response plans established, understood, and deployed.
6 Sustenance audit/monitoring plan - established.
7 (Project Closure) Transfer ownership and knowledge to process owner and process team tasked with the responsibilities.
Conclude phase Checklist

# Check points
1 VOC - After improvement obtained.
2 Sponsor/PH feedback obtained.
3 Financial savings vetted.
4 Way forward - Future improvement projects related to project scope/actions identified.
5 Lessons learnt, Acknowledgements, tools used - completed.
6 One page executive summary completed.
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 68 of 72
Annexure no 5 – JDI Template

Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 69 of 72
Annexure no 6 – KKD Template

Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 70 of 72
Annexure no 7 – BPS A3
Application Case Study

Title of Project: To reduce Hole offset issue PPM by 80% in Cheetah models
1. Problem Identification: 3. Analysis: 4. Action

UOM: PPM Cause & Effect Diagram:
Baseline: 31700 Target: 5330
AFTER EDM
RELEASED RELAY
SHAFT MTG HOLE
70% of overall frame assembly rework is contributed by hole off set issue in DIA INCREASED
cheetah models, while the remaining 30% contributed by other models FROM 35.0MM TO
39.5MM
2. Observation: Cause Validation(For critical causes):
1) Histogram - FSM Dimensions
Hole off set in both FSM &

flitch depicted, reasons not 5. Check
clear, need investigation
Hole shifts
issue reduced
to zero PPM
(Dec ‘14 & Jan
Process Flow ‘15), after
In all observed samples, production cut
dimensions were within spec off on
Dec ’14
2) Cumulative error
Histogram - Hole diameter – Aug ‘14 (after spring bracket fitment)
6. Standardize:
Why-Why Analysis
Baseline:
Design of clutch relay shaft

hole diameter to be 7.Conclusion
revisited Benefits from the project:
Rework has been reduced
Improved Quality awareness
In all observed samples, hole dia were found outside spec Improved customer satisfaction
Inconsistencies observed, high in in 4 models
Jan-14 & Jun-14 were investigated, reasons not clear. Baseline PPM 31,700
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 71 of 72
Annexure no 8 – APS A3
Application Case Study

Title of Application Case study: Reduction in breakdown frequency of ADC (Auto Die Change) in 1200Ton Press Machine in month July-aug'14.
1. Problem Identification: 3. Analysis: B).

A). Switch mode power supply (SMPS) voltage low during Auto Die Change
A). Interrruption in ADC (Auto Die Change) occurs in 1200Ton press, condition, but during line production SMPS voltage found constant 24VDC .
which results in stoppage of the cab press line. The ADC operation Moving Bolster variable frequency drive comes in operation during ADC.
has to be carried out manually which takes approximately 30 mins, Moving Bolster variable frequency drive magnetic field generate harmonic
instead of 4 mins. in auto die change mode. noise, Which may responsible for dropping SMPS Voltage.
KPOVs
KPIVs (Xs) C/U Process
(Ys)
MB drive Parameter
Carrier Frequency
Carrier
X1 C
Supply Frequency. Frequency SMPS Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects
SMPS (response is SMPS Voltage, Alpha = 0.05)
Supply 24 VDC Y1 2.201
Acceleration X2 C Voltage Factor

A
Name
Carrier Fz
Frequency Constant A B
C
Supply Fz
A cceleration
X3 Acceleration C B
Term
AC
Inference : 1200Ton press breakdown is the major contributor in B). Factory setting value of above parameter in the variable frequency drive.
month July-Aug'14 due to ADC (Auto Die Change) problem. S. NO. Parameter Current Value Min/Max Range C
B). Nos. of ADC occurs and nos. of ADC failed in month July-Aug'14
1 Carrier Frequency 3 KHz 1-15 (KHz) Inference:
0
A, B1& AC2are significant
3 4
after
Standardized Effect
5
reducing
6 7
the model.
observaed.
Date Nos. of ADC ADC Failed Date Nos. of ADC ADC Failed 2 Supply Frequency 40 Hz 0~400 Hz C). Main effect & Interaction plot found after DOE analysis.
8July'14 1 0 16Aug'14 3 1 3 Acceleration 5 Sec 0-6000 (Sec) Main Effects Plot for SMPS Voltage Interaction Plot for SMPS Voltage
12July'14 1 0 18Aug'14 2 0 Data Means Data Means
C). Analysis of variable data. Plotting of graph with different variables and Carrier Fz Supply Fz 30 40 1 5
15July'14 1 1 20Aug'14 2 2 23.96 24.0 Carrier Fz
regression analysis. 23.92 1
16July'14 1 0 22Aug'14 2 2 23.88 Carrier Fz
23.9
3
23.84 23.8
23.80 Carrier Fz
Mean
21July'14 1 0 26Aug'14 1 1 Multi-Vari Chart for SMPS VOLT by Carrier Fz. - Acceleration 1 3 30 40 24.0 Supply 1Fz
330
23.9
30 35 40 Acceleration Supply Fz 40
22July'14 2 1 27Aug'14 1 1 23.96 23.8
1 5 Car r ier Fz. 23.92
1 23.88
24.00
23July'14 2 1 2 23.84
3
23.80 Acceleration
23.95
1 5
28July'14 3 3
SMPS VOLT
23.90
2Aug'14 1 1 Nos of ADC failure
Inference: 1. Interaction plot between carrier frequency & acceleration having strong
23.85
B/d fz in % = ------------------------ X100 relationship.
23.80
6Aug'14 1 1 Nos. of ADC occurs 2. Carrier frequency & supply frequency are significant in main effect.
23.75
7Aug'14 1 1 D). Through the response optimizer we will found the best suited value for
= 54.8 % 23.70
11Aug'14 2 1 30 35 40
maximum of 24 VDC.
Supply Fz Optimal Carrier Supply F Accelera
13Aug'14 2 0 D High
Cur
3.0
[1.0]
40.0
[30.0]
5.0
[1.0]
Panel variable: Acceleration 1.0000 Low 1.0 30.0 1.0
14Aug'14 1 0
2. Observation: Composite
Desirability
1.0000
A). During the Auto Die Change, machine stopped and the reason
behind was fluctuation of Switched mode power supply (SMPS)
SMPS Vol
voltage. Ideally it should be 24VDC. During ADC SMPS voltage Maximum
y = 24.030
founded fluctuate upto 23.6VDC. d = 1.0000
Inference: Best suited value of Carrier fz, supply fz & acceleration are 1, 30
•Auto Di e Cha nge Stopped & 1 respectively for getting 24 VDC.
Why S. NO. Parameter Current value Modified Value
3 KHz 1 KHz
Inference : Analysis of regression equation shows that all the variable factors 1 Carrier Frequency
•PLC getti ng OFF/ON are significant for Switched mode power supply voltage.
Why 40 Hz 30 Hz
2 Supply Frequency
4. Action : 3 Acceleration 5 Sec 1 Sec
• Switched mode power
supply (SMPS) 24VDC 5. Check :
A). After the regression analysis found all 3 variables are significant. Then
Why getting fluctuate Variable frequency drive parameter modified and checked the SMPS Voltage
DOE (Design of experiment) result & response optimizer gives the better
during ADC.
output for making decision.
And Auto Die Change checked in Apr-May'15
B). Switched mode power supply (SMPS) voltage observation during
Histogram of SMPS VOLT
ADC. 23.9
25 24.1
Histogram of SMPS VOLT
23.9 20
25 24.1
Frequency
20 15
Frequency
15
10
10
5
5
0
0 23.9 24.0 24.1
23.6 23.7 23.8 23.9 24.0
SMPS VOLT SMPS VOLT
Inference: Switched mode power supply (SMPS) Voltage value found Inference :
significant low (upto 23.6VDC). 1. Switched mode power supply voltage increased from 23.6VDC to 24VDC.
C). Comparision of Switched mode power supply (SMPS) voltage during
Auto Die Change between others Press Machines. Pareto Chart of the Standardized Effects 2. Auto Die Change Breakdown failure % reduced from 54.8% to 0 %
(response is SMPS Voltage, Alpha = 0.05)
2.306 6. Standardization:
Factor Name
A A Carrier Fz
B Supply Fz 1. Variable frq. drive parameter modified & saved in electrial drawing.
B C A cceleration
2. Variable frq. drive mounting position shifted from its original position as a
AC
parmanent counter measure so that the effect of Moving bolster alternate
Term
AB
frequency drive magnetic field will not effect the Switched mode power
ABC supply voltage.
BC 7. Conclution :
C
1. Auto Die Change breakdown frequenc y reduc ed from 54 % to 0 %.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Standardized Effect 2. Suc c essfully adheranc e of c yc le time for ADC in press line.
Inference: Result shows difference among the SMPS Volt means of 3 3. Manual approac h eliminated for ADC.
Inference: We can omit BC, ABC & AB one by one as the P value above 0.05.
different presses machine are significant. 4. Oppurtinity cost saving of around Rs.-2,40,000 / Year.
Procedure No: -
Issue No: 3
Page : 72 of 72
Annexure no 9 – Finance Vetting Template
Problem Solving Project - Finance Validation - One Page Executive Summary

Project Title
Shop/Function/
PS Project Code Date
Unit
Project Leader Name with Project Leader Project Leader

Mob No Emp No Photo
Project Sponsor Name with Project Sponsor

Project Sponsor Photo
Mob No Emp No
PS Facilitator PS Champion Name

Category (BPS/APS)
Name (Pl a nt /Corp Functi on Hea d)
Project Start Date Project End Date

Lead Time (Days)
(DD/MM/YY) (DD/MM/YY)
CFT Members names with
Shop/Designation :
Project Metric & UoM Project Baseline Project Target Achieved Description of Key improvement actions
Shop or Dept Level / Plant Function or Corporate

Stakeholder Impact (√) Internal Customer / End Customer Criticality (√)
function Level / Business Level
Warranty cost reduction / Operating expenditure reduction / Working capital reduction /
Linkage to Business Critical Quality improvement / Schedule adherence improvement / Capacity utilization /
Success Factors (√) Customer Satisfaction improvement / Ontime New product launch / Market share improvement /
New business development / Value analysis & engineering / Variety reduction / Inventory reduction
Project Financial Savings - Summary Savings Category (√) Recurring / One-time
Before Project * After Project * Difference No of enclosures &
Description Metric with UoM
( ) ( ) (Before & After) Enclosures ref no **
Total
Expected date of
Hor.deployment description Completion status Pending Remarks (if any)
completion if pending
Cost of investments (or) MPB Volumes

Expenditure incurred in INR INR Savings/Unit (FY Budgeted Prod Nos
(if any) of the Project area/shop)
* Indicate data time period,
*** Forecasted Savings
** Supporting docs with calculations to be enclosed as
Realized savings in in INR (Savings/unit X MPB
per guidelines,
*** For projecting Net INR savings p.a, FY MPB budgeted INR volumes fr the remaining
production nos of project area to be taken months in FY)
Project Leader sign with Sponsor sign with HOD sign with Checked by with Authorised by with
designation & date designation & date designation & date designation & date date, designation & seal
Thank You

AL Problem Solving Process Manual - Updated 10 - May 2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AL Problem Solving Process Manual - Updated 10 - May 2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AL Problem Solving Process Manual - Updated 10 - May 2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ashok Leyland

Problem Solving Manual

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

Problem Solving Process Manual – Preface

ALPS (Ashok Leyland Problem Solving) is a customized methodology to drive Problem

It is deployed through various approaches right from structured investigations at

ALPS Methodology signifies a common problem solving language across the

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

# Key Processes Page Nos Total Pages

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By : Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

1.0 Introduction to Ashok Leyland Problem Solving Model (ALPS)

Scope: Applicable to all functions in AL for problem solving

Criteria for identification:

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By : Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

1.0 Introduction to Ashok Leyland Problem Solving Model (ALPS)

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

1.0 Introduction to Ashok Leyland Problem Solving Model (ALPS)

Steps Key Deliverables

Steps Key Deliverables

Process Responsibility: LSS BB, LSS MBB

Process Ownership: Plant or Function LSS BB

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head - LSS

2.0 Problem Identification & Classification

Scope: Applicable to all functions in AL

Policy Management, Daily Work Management, KRA Gap analysis

Consolidation & scoping of Projects

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

2.0 Problem Identification & Classification

Assess grid To be taken up as

Assess grid Assess grid

Impact > 40 Impact > 40

Rating/grading scale of 1,3,9 under each criteria depicts the following:

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

2.0 Problem Identification & Classification

Selection grid - Problem solving methodology

Complexity Score Assessment

Rating Rating guidelines

Selective models (within Across segment & across

Potential causes known based Potential causes not

Impact Score Assessment

Rating Rating guidelines

Financial savings (or)

Direct impact on Internal

Across AL / More than one

Impact score 47%

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

2.0 Problem Identification & Classification

PROBLEM SOLVING Date: 20-01-2016

PROCESS MANUAL Authorized By: Sachin Goel, Head – LSS

2.0 Problem Identification & Classification