SunilGupta

Nominal group technique (NGT) is a structured method for group brainstorming that encourages contributions from everyone whereas the objective of brainstorming is to provide participants an opportunity to engage in creative problem solving. Nominal group technique (NGT) uses a more structured format to obtain multiple inputs from several people on a particular problem or issue however NGT is not used as often as it should be. Each member of the group writes down his or her ideas which are then discussed and prioritized one by one by the group, thus the word “Nominal” with limited vocal interaction. Following is the way basis which the Nominal Group Technique is conducted with limited vocal interaction: 1. The facilitator discusses the problem which requires decision 2. The participants are given time to write down there ideas and thoughts that come in their minds for the problem. No discussion is allowed with other members / group members 3. Once all the members have written, they are allowed to share the ideas with the group members 4. The facilitator writes down the ideas of each group on the flip chart. It gives all the members equal opportunity to share what they feel 5. Once the key points from the ideas are written on the flip chart, each member explains his/her point to the other members. 6. The facilitator tries to maintain the discussion as neutral as possible, thereby avoiding the criticism and judgement 7. Once all the points are discussed and explained, the members are asked to give vote or rank various ideas by prioritizing these in relation to the problem There are advantages and disadvantages in any technique we use. Some of the advantages and disadvantages with Nominal Group Technique is laid down below: Advantages: Voting is anonymous Equal opportunity to speak Interactions within group members and hence distractions inherent in other group methods are minimized. Scope of too many volunteers or speakers is minimized with limited vocal interaction Disadvantages: Opinions may not converge in the voting process Cross-fertilization of ideas may be constrained Mechanical process Scenarios when NGT be preferred? When some group members are much more vocal than others When some group members think better in silence When some group members are quiet and shy When there is concern about some members not participating When the group does not easily generate quantities of ideas When all or some group members are new to the team When the issue is controversial or there is heated conflict

What is FTA ? Fault tree analysis (FTA) is a tool originally developed in 1962 by Bell Labs for use in studying failure modes in the launch control system of the Minuteman missile project. The tool now finds wide use in numerous applications from accident investigation to design prototyping and is also finding use for protection and control related applications. Fault tree analysis is a top-down approach to identify all potential causes leading to a defect. Each cause is further broken down into least possible events or faults. The analysis begins with a major defect. All the potential events – individual or in combination – that may cause the defect are identified. Potential events are further traced down in a similar way to the lowest possible level. A fault tree diagram is used to conduct fault tree analysis (or FTA). Fault tree analysis helps determine the cause of failure or test the reliability of a system by stepping through a series of events logically. Purpose of FTA: The main purpose of the fault tree analysis is to help identify potential causes of system failures before the failures actually occur. These calculations involve system quantitative reliability and maintainability information, such as failure probability, failure rate and repair rate Difference between FMEA & FTA: FMEA (Failure Mode Effect Analysis) FTA (Fault Tree Analysis) FMEA is a “Bottom-Up” technique which examines the failure modes of the components within a system and identifies the potential effects of each component failure mode. As such, it is a CAUSE => EFFECT model. FTA is the reverse of FMEA in that it is concerned with the identification and analysis of conditions including component failures that lead to the occurrence of a defined effect. As such, it is an EFFECT => CAUSE model. FMEA will be more appropriate than FTA when you suspect that a large number of distinct system conditions exist with a range of unacceptable consequences. Consider using FTA rather than FMEA when you are particularly concerned about one or just a few system conditions that pose unacceptable consequences. FMEA is more suited to analysing systems that contain little or no redundancy and does not examine the effects of multiple failures at system level (apart from common cause failures). FTA is very good at showing how robust a system will be to one or more initiating faults. Thus for systems with high levels of redundancy FTA will be more appropriate. FMEA records the system effects of each failure cause in a tabular format. FTA enables the fault/failure logic within a system of a particular effect of interest to be represented in diagrammatic form FMEA implicitly considers all adverse effects that may occur as a result of any single failure. FTA focuses on a defined adverse effect. In summary FTA will identify combinations of conditions and component failures which will lead to a single defined adverse effect. FMEA on the other hand considers all single component failures in turn and identifies the range of their effects on the system. Usefulness and Advantages of using FTA The biggest advantage of using FTA is that it starts from a top event that is selected by the user for a specific interest and the tree developed will identify the root cause. The FTA has the ability to be used with computer and generate results using computer applications for improved analysis. A fault tree creates a visual record of a system that shows the logical relationships between events and causes that lead to failure. It helps others quickly understand the results of your analysis and pinpoint weaknesses in the design and identify errors. A fault tree diagram will help prioritize issues to fix that contribute to a failure. In many ways, the fault tree diagram creates the foundation for any further analysis and evaluation. For example, when changes or upgrades are made to the system, you already have a set of steps to evaluate for possible effects and changes. You can use a fault tree diagram to help you design quality tests and maintenance procedures Fault tree analysis is useful in engineering, especially in industries where failure can have huge consequences such as nuclear power or aeronautics. However, fault tree analysis can also be used during software development to debug complex systems. Effectiveness of FTA FTA is a very effective risk assessment tool but when it comes to a reasonably complex system, that includes a large number of equipment and process variables, the fault tree becomes enormous and takes quite of a time to be completed. A team of engineers works over it and even then it may take years to complete without the surety of weather all the failure possibilities are considered or not. The concept of partial failure in a fault tree does not exist. If the equipment is partially working it is considered as fully unavailable or in failure mode. This partial failure changes the reliability of a system but the FTA has no effect of such condition in its results. If a fault tree is developed by different safety professionals, it will be of different nature depending on the developer. This makes the fault tree a non-generic or inexact in nature. Circumstances where it is likely to be least useful Fault trees represent a deductive approach to determining the causes contributing to a designated failure. The approach begins with the definition of a top or undesired event, and branches backward through intermediate events until the top event is defined in terms of basic events. A basic event is an event for which further development would not be useful for the purpose at hand. For example, for a quantitative fault tree, if a frequency or probability for a failure can be determined without further development of the failure logic, then there is no point to further development, and the event is regarded as basic. Last but not the least ! Working in the service industry for so many years and using FMEA as a tool to identify cause & effect relationship, it was a good oppurtunity to deep dive and learn on a concept which is not widely talked about and also not in many curriculum of Black Belt or Master Black Belt Programs.

In the Lean Management philosophy, all activities in an organization are grouped into two categories: · value-added (VA) activities, and · non-value-added (NVA) activities. In the context of Lean Management, VA and NVA activities are viewed from the customer’s perspective. VA activities are those that bring additional value to products or services. Examples include entering orders, ordering materials, laying foundations, creating codes, assembling parts and shipping of goods to customers. Customers are willing to pay for these improvements that can change the form, fit or function of a product or service. On the other hand, NVA activities are tasks that do not increase market form or function. Examples are filing, copying, recording, waiting, counting, checking, inspecting, testing, reviewing and obtaining approvals. These activities should be eliminated, simplified or reduced. By tackling wastes from an end-to-end business process, not only can your company improve the value of its products and services, you can also achieve significant cost reduction, strengthen cash flow and emerge from the downturn with a stronger and more competitive profile The ability to identify waste in your organization is the first step towards its elimination. A common problem-solving technique is the PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) approach. Generally, we go with these questions as prescriptions for value addition in most of the circumstances. However, we modify depending on the process / situation, for example we treat NVA as business value added in many of the circumstances. If the task is essential for internal customers; we may like to name it as Business Value Add (BVA) instead of NVA. Business Value Added (BVA) sometimes called Type I NVA. These activities provide no value to customers (as defined above), but are necessary given current process limitations. Common examples are inspections, management approvals, most quality assurance activities; technical support activities.

Real life is… a perpetual compromise between the ideal and the possible; but the world of pure reason knows no compromise, no practical limitations, no barrier to the creative activity.” - Bertrand Russell Most organizations have barriers to creativity, ideas, and innovation. Some are obvious while some are more subtle. Some barriers emerge from attitudes and perceptions of organizational leadership while others come from organizational structure or even from the employees themselves. Since these barriers have a tendency to eliminate creative possibilities from the organization, identifying and removing barriers to creativity and innovation is crucial. By pinpointing, recognizing, and acknowledging that barriers exist, an organization can bypass many common obstacles and become more idea-oriented by employing simple strategies. Few Common Workplace Barriers as a significant roadblock: Immovable Forces Cause: Resistance to new ideas and processes happens because it’s human nature to become uncomfortable when confronting potential change agents. Management and leadership tend to resist because creativity often means embracing uncertainty and may pose possible difficulties in measuring returns on investment. Effect: Old habits, beliefs, and assumptions cloud openness to new ideas and overpower creative and innovative initiatives. The status quo remains in place and nothing changes. Judgment Cause: Fear of a new idea is often manifested as criticism and sometimes harsh judgment. People mock and ridicule what they don’t understand. Effect: Employees who have ideas are reluctant to share because they worry that no one will like the idea. They are afraid of ridicule or the implications of possible failure. Playing by the Rules and No Process Cause: Policies and procedures, inflexible and rigid organizational structures, traditions, and a culture of playing by the rules, are keeping employees from participating, stifling any innovative or creative processes. Employees have ideas and want to share them but all they see is a dusty suggestion box. No other channels to input ideas are known by members to exist. Effect: An oppressive environment has a tendency to force employees to conform to accepted patterns, rules, and inherent limitations of the status quo. This hampers creative thinking and new ideas. Past organizational experience shows employees that ideas put in the suggestion box disappear into a black hole so employees don’t bother to submit anything. They may feel there is no reason to get involved. Strategy for overcoming barriers : Share stories about creativity and innovation in a workplace setting through all available channels to put creativity into context and to dispel preconceived notions about creativity and innovation. Invite and encourage all employees, from all levels and departments, to become involved with innovative initiatives. Although some rules are necessary, many can suppress innovation and ideas. Consider if some of the rules can be relaxed, changed, updated or eliminated to make allowances for the idea process to flourish. Make it easy for employees to input ideas through a variety of different channels and technologies to encourage inputs. Have leadership acknowledge and celebrate the value of ideas even if they can’t be utilized. If an idea works, use Lean Six Sigma methodology to develop it. In an era of constant innovation and discovery, we may not realize that most inventions take years, even decades, to develop. Although, some breakthroughs take a lifetime of dedication, the curious mind needn't worry. As history shows us, people have crafted new inventions and stumbled upon discoveries by accident. To agree with Nobel prize-winning biochemist Albert Szent-Györgyi: "A discovery is said to be an accident meeting a prepared mind". Some inventions were serendipitous, meaning they were stumbled upon by chance, whereas others occurred while the inventors were trying to discover something else. In today's marketplace, increased globalization, constant technological advances and other competitive pressures, innovation is a proven success factor for many firms. The resulting opportunities and threats have placed innovation near the top of manager's priority lists. To survive in today's marketplace, manufacturers must embrace new ideas and processes. Lean Six Sigma is a business improvement methodology that maximizes shareholder value by achieving the fastest rate of improvement in customer satisfaction, cost, quality, process speed, and invested capital. Yes, there are relevant values in the use of Lean Six Sigma in the world of product innovation. As innovation is pushed into this rapid product development cycle, heightened expectations of the marketplace call for better tools to improve the productivity of the innovation process. Therefore, tools to improve the innovation process is coupled with Six Sigma discipline and data can be the best way to get result and with Lean techniques to simplify this process. Companies across the world are successfully using the techniques for improving business performance through product and process excellence.