SLIDE 1
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING REPORTING
Green Belt Lean S ix S igma Proj ect Report Out Julianne Finnegan Ohio Rail Development Commission S eptember 27, 2018
2 |
HOW DID WE GET HERE?
- The current “ On the Job Training”
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING REPORTING HOW DID WE GET HERE? o The current On - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
ON-THE-JOB TRAINING REPORTING HOW DID WE GET HERE? o The current On - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Green Belt Lean S ix S igma Proj ect Report Out Julianne Finnegan Ohio Rail Development Commission S eptember 27, 2018 ON-THE-JOB TRAINING REPORTING HOW DID WE GET HERE? o The current On the Job Training process is not accurately
SLIDE 2
SLIDE 3
OJT KAIZEN EVENT, MAY 16, 2018
SLIDE 4
4 |
OJT TEAM
Front Row: Lloyd MacAdam, ODOT; Lauren Purdy, ODOT; Robin Kaufman, Kokosing; Jackie Jacob, The Great Lakes Construction Co.; Laurie Leffler, FHWA; Gary Kramer, ODOT; S econd Row: Clint Bishop, ODOT; Isaac S need, OOD; David Walker, ODOT; Advait S upanekar, ODOT; Peter Jones, ODOT; Brad Jones, ODOT; Brian Hupp, ODOT; Gary Angles, ODOT; Deborah Green, ODOT; Jack Marchbanks, ODOT; S abrina Bell, ODOT; Chris Engles, OCA Rachyl S mith, FHWA; Not S hown: Eric Ross FHWA.
SLIDE 5
5 |
SCOPE OF THE EVENT
Goal is S et
Report to Federal Highway Administration
SLIDE 6
6 |
PROCESS IMPROVEMENT GOALS
- ODOT to become
the leader/ create the best practice for OJT process
- Foster
ODI/ Construction Partnership
- Accurate &
Complete On the Job Training
- Reach established
goal for OJT program
- Review current CRL
system
SLIDE 7
7 |
22058.00 656844.41 678902.41 3.25% 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 OJT HOURS NON-OJT HOURS TOTAL HOURS % OF OJT HOURS
OJT – October, 2017
29787.00 656844.41 686631.41 4.34% 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 700000 800000 OJT HOURS NON-OJT HOURS TOTAL HOURS % OF OJT HOURS
OJT – October, 2017 (POTENTIAL)
BAS ELINE DATA
SLIDE 8
8 |
SIPOC
Identified S cope of Event, S uppliers, Inputs, Outputs and Customers
SLIDE 9
9 |
CURRENT STATE PROCESS MAP
Team process mapped the current OJT process
SLIDE 10
10 |
LEAN TOOLS
TIM U WOOD, S tandardization, Brainstorming (70+ ideas!), Challenges and Opportunities
SLIDE 11
11 |
FUTURE STATE
Team reported out on Future S tate
SLIDE 12
12 |
Measure Before After Difference Process S teps 26 37 11 Decisions 5 8 3 Handoffs 11 7
- 4
Loop Backs 2 7 5 Waste Points 16 n/ a n/ a
PROJECT METRICS
SLIDE 13
13 |
PROJECT BENEFITS
- INTANGIBLE
- Identified what wasn’ t working
- Created OJT Committee
- Established a process that
works
- Created stakeholder network/
right team invested in process
SLIDE 14
14 |
IMPROVEMENT S UMMARY
Current Key Issues
Inaccurate & incomplete reporting Unclear program S
- ftware Issues
How We Improved
Identified existing accurate report Created Program Plan with Committee oversight Identified areas to improve software functionality
SLIDE 15
15 |
S ub-committees created to work on Data, Workforce, and Goals
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
SLIDE 16
16 |
AS A RES ULT
0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% I29 CRL S P TOTAL REPORT TO S TATE (CRL+S P) S ELF-REPORT (9mo. assumpt ion) 7.09% 5.83% 5.41% 5.61% 7.73%
% OJT - S AMPLE
- Program Plan submission early October
- Defined Workforce
- ODI/ Industry Communication
- ODOT = Best Practices
- Data S
- lution
SLIDE 17
17 |
S PECIAL THANKS TO…
Senior Leadership:
- Director Wray, Executive Director Dietrich
Sponsors:
- Jack Marchbanks, Lloyd MacAdam and Laurie Leffler, FHWA
Team Leaders:
- Lauren Purdy and Brad Jones
Subject Matter Experts:
- Mark Kelsey, City of Upper Arlington; Chris Engle, OCA
Customers:
- Kokosing, The Great Lakes Construction Co.
SLIDE 18
18 |
S PECIAL THANKS TO…
MEGHAN ALTIER – Mentor, Co-Facilitator, Champion
SLIDE 19
19 |
?
QUES TIONS
Last updated 9/26/2018
Ti t l e or Event Name (go t o Inser t > Header s & Foot er s t o change)