-MSD279A-Term Project

.docx

School

Portland Community College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

279A

Subject

Management

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by CoachFang13845

Continuous Improvement The term continuous improvement (CI) is the continuous endeavor to improve products, services, or processes, either by gradual, small-step improvements over time or by developments that may occur all at once. Its cornerstones are putting fresh prospects for improvement into practice, evaluating the effects of these endeavors, and subsequently disseminating the results. An organization's cycle eventually becomes more self-sustaining, resulting in increased excitement and participation from all parties involved. As a result, the PDCA mode works for a variety of reasons. First of all, it is a doable, methodical, and sequential approach that employs data-driven evidence to direct change. Additionally, it is continuous in that advancements are made gradually rather than all at once. Furthermore, the cycle itself is doable; implementers may quickly adjust their plan of action in response to observable changes, and they can incorporate additional CI tools or processes as needed. As is well known, keeping precise inventory enables businesses to sell their products more quickly and prevents customer orders from being canceled. Therefore, I will use CI, PDCA, and a six-step problem-solving method with sub-steps to identify and define the problem as I address the inventory discrepancies in my organization in this work. In order to reduce the impact on my organization, this step would assist me in developing solutions that I can standardize throughout my department. Colleagues who work with people from diverse origins and cultures occasionally get into conflicts at work. Nonetheless, there are instances when it is beneficial to see the problem from several angles, and discussing potential solutions among team members boosts output. I manage a warehouse and my team consists of four individuals with varying backgrounds and work styles. Twenty-four-year-old Javen Alarcon, my warehouse lead, has no prior flooring business experience. But since 2020, he has demonstrated to me how passionately he works. He succeeded in doing so because I had been training him for the past two years to have a

work style that is similar to mine. One of my team members, Alex Garcia, is from Mexico and doesn't speak much English. But, he has worked with me for more than 6 years and has demonstrated that language is not always a barrier and that you can complete the work without speaking the language. Although Nathan Huck and Cameron Teague were only recently hired, their contributions, diligence, and aptitude for learning have demonstrated their compatibility with the team and assisted us in generating fresh concepts and improving our existing ones. We decided to create a plan of action after informal brainstorming sessions when inventory inconsistencies started to occur. To begin with, we had to get to know one another better and the task at hand because, as we all knew, this process would not be simple for everyone. We would identify everyone's abilities and weaknesses in this step. Everyone focused on the aims and goals of this phase and was really cordial with one another. Storming was the action we took, where we began to test the boundaries we had established during the Forming stage. In this phase, we attempt to determine the best course of action and resolve any underlying issues and miscommunications that arose throughout the task process. We thus began exchanging thoughts and perspectives, and every team member behaved well and worked well together.Following the storming phase, we proceeded to the next phase, which involved assembling the plan and beginning the process of reaching bipartisan decisions and putting them into action. Our brilliant ideas came to pass at this phase, and we were aware that there would be some danger and disappointment. As a result, we talked about the roles and duties of each team member. As a leader, I employed a coaching style throughout this time and sought out my team's solutions before offering them mine. We went on to the following phase, which was performance, after finishing the norming phase. We knew we were well-organized and functional when we reached our consensus and cooperated. Our organization was steady and well-defined, and everyone in the team was dedicated to the group's goal. We remained committed to finding solutions and achieving our objectives, despite the ongoing dispute among certain team members.Our goals and objectives had finally been attained, and we were

prepared to complete the remaining duties and record our efforts and outcomes. Consequently, I saw that everyone in my team is really pleased with the outcome and the teamwork. Through this effort, everyone was able to communicate directly and openly about their ideas and worries. Each step was carefully considered, and a suitable example that would answer the questions was used for each. I had to comprehend how people felt about the company, the problems they face on a daily basis, and the best way to solve those problems in order to make clear our objective and target. After I provided an example and related my personal experience to each question, they responded in a very straightforward manner and with a sense of increased openness. I believe it's fantastic that everyone was accepting full responsibility for their role in this project, and their positive conduct was a result of their desire to finish the project and demonstrate their problem-solving abilities. As a result, I think their cooperation on this project was excellent, and they politely shared their opinions and concerns. We first discuss PDCA as a team and the steps that will be done to define and identify the problem. Subsequently, I posed four major questions to get their responses and, if any, concerns. I believe that all of these questions were satisfactorily addressed, and we were able to reach our goal. Since I prepared everything ahead of time and used the slide show to walk through the circumstances, our target and our proposal step-by-step in our STP. There could be a variety of problems that team members could run into when it comes to inventory discrepancies, so we need to think very carefully about the process in order to identify and define the issue. I had to conduct extensive research for this process in order to gather all the data I required and clarify the issue with my teammates. SITUATION The shipping, receiving, and accounting teams face inaccurate inventory for flooring. According to data in NetSuite and ERP, there were 8K boxes of flooring that were extra and missing. (when/where) since last May, and nobody has identified why we had this many discrepancies in

the inventory. Manufacturing runs 24/7, so there are 4 shifts: A, B, C, and D. However, the shipping and receiving department has only 1 shift, which is 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and this discrepancy was caused by the shipping and receiving department.. (How much/the pain) The cost was very high, and it affected our bonuses because each year we receive a bonus between January and February; however, this year we haven’t received the bonus yet because of this issue. The current loss was $79,553. TARGET My goal is to make sure each item is verified by three different departments before entering the warehouse: QC, production, and the warehouse department. Last year, I developed a verification system and set up a SOP for this process. However, newly hired people have never been trained before they start working, so I set up a training session for new hires at least 3 weeks before they take over the job and work independently. PROPOSAL: I used the PDCA/Team Problem Solving Process provided to work to improve this issue. As a team we used multiple different data collections tools such as inventory transfer sheet, return authorization sheet, and inventory adjustment form. To summarize, Qty Physical Count 121,276 NS 114,892

Extra inventory found 6,384 The inventory transfer document below indicates that although the products were produced on January 10, 2023, data was never recorded into the system. As a result, the quality team and warehouse team failed to sign the form and confirm that the merchandise had been moved into the warehouse. Because we had 6,384 extra boxes in the inventory, this assisted me in identifying the variances. Therefore, I used return authorization data to find more information regarding the discrepancy, which indicates that AHF returned the below items, but the warehouse team never informed the accounting department to receive this data into the system.

To compare what they produced over the previous 30 days and discover what was entered into the system, I also gathered inventory adjustment data from the production line. But I did discover a few mistakes. For example, each pallet for a Costco shipment should include 56 boxes of flooring; nevertheless, the manufacturing crew unintentionally packed 60 boxes and sent out an additional 4 boxes of flooring per pallet. Below is one example.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version