Recorded webinar: http://slidesha.re/18boq16 Part 1 - http://slidesha.re/15qe1qW Part 3 - http://slidesha.re/139L8Sb (Excel tool product demo) Subscribe: http://www.ksmartin.com/subscribe To purchase the book: http://bit.ly/MBPMbk Metrics-Based Process Mapping (MBPM) is a methodology that was developed to support the adoption of lean practices in office, service, and knowledge work environments. Designed and developed by Karen Martin & Mike Osterling, this technique integrates the functional orientation of conventional swim-lane process maps with the time and quality metrics used in value stream mapping.

1. Company
LOGO
Metrics-Based Process Mapping
Part 2 of 3

2. 2
Karen Martin, Principal
Karen Martin & Associates
www.ksmartin.com
Mike Osterling, President
Osterling Consulting
www.mosterling.com
Chapter 12 –
Metrics-Based Process Mapping
(manual method)
Excel Tool for Archiving
Completed Maps
Available from Productivity Press, Amazon, or any
major bookseller
About Us

3. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 3
Metrics-Based Process Mapping:
Three-Part Series
Part 1: Document the current state.
Part 2: Analyze the current state; design
and implement the future state.
Part 3: Document the improved process.

4. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 4
1. Label the map in upper right corner.
 Process name, date, facilitator and/or team members
2. List the functions involved in left column.
3. Document all activities/steps.
 Verb/noun; concise language; include function as well.
4. Number the activities.
 One number per column; concurrent activities are
labeled A, B, C, etc.
5. Add activity-specific metrics (PT, LT, %C&A),
barriers to flow, and number of staff involved
(if relevant).
 Include units of measure (mins, hrs, days, etc.)
Creating the Current State MBPM
Phase I

5. Metrics-Based Process Mapping
(MBPM)

6. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 6
Creating the Current State MBPM
Phase II
6. Define the critical path.
 Longest LT unless “dead-end” step; use colored marker
7. Create the timeline.
8. Calculate the summary metrics
 CP PT Sum, CP LT Sum, AR, RFPY, Total PT, Labor
Required
9. Define the value-adding and necessary non-
value-adding activities
 Use small colored post-it labeled with “VA” and “N.”
10. Circle the step-specific metrics that indicate the
greatest opportunity for improvement.
 Use red marker.
 Longest LTs, Low %C&As, High PTs, Low step-specific ARs

7. Step 6: Define the “Timeline Critical Path”
For parallel activities: Chose the longest LT unless a
“dead-end” activity

8. Step 7: Create the Timeline

9. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Document the Current State
Step 8 – Calculate the summary metrics
 Critical Path (timeline) PT Sum
 Critical Path (timeline) LT Sum
 % Activity
 (PT Sum/Total LT Sum) x 100
 Rolled First Pass Yield (RFPY)
 %C&A x %C&A x %C&A…
 Include ALL post-its, not just critical path
 Labor Requirements (see next slide)
9

10. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Summary Metrics: Labor Requirements
Total PT
 Sum of all activities, not just timeline
Labor Requirements
10
Total PT (in hrs) X # occurrences per year
# FTEs*
Available work hrs per year per employee
=
* FTE = Full-time Equivalent (e.g. Two half-time employees = 1 FTE)
Available work
hour per year
per employee
= 2,080 – (paid holidays + paid vacations)

11. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Summary Metrics:
Current State Findings
11
Metric Current State
Projected
Future State
Projected %
Improvement
Timeline Process Time
Sum
Timeline Lead Time Sum
Activity Ratio
Rolled First Pass Yield
Total Process Time
Labor requirements
Freed capacity (FTEs)

12. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Document the Current State
Step 9 – Identify the value-adding (VA)
and necessary non-value-adding (N)
activities
 Use small colored post-its labeled with “VA” or
“N”.
 All unlabelled post-its represent waste.
 NOTE – this is the first of two “bridge steps”
between current state documentation and
future state design.
12

13. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 13
Defining Value
Value-Adding (VA) - any operation or
activity your external customers value
and are (or would be) willing to pay for.
Non-Value-Adding (NVA) - any operation
or activity that consumes time and/or
resources but does not add value to the
service provided or product sold to the
customer.
 Necessary - regulatory or necessary for the
business to function effectively, etc.
 Unnecessary - everything else - WASTE

14. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Step 9: Label the value-adding (VA) and
necessary non-value adding (N) activities
14

15. Step 10: Circle the data that indicates the
greatest need for improvement
Greatest need for
improvement:
• High LT
• High PT
• Low PT/LT ratio
• %C&A below 80%
• Other barriers to flow

16. Root Cause Analysis: 4 Key Tools
CauseCause--andand--Effect DiagramEffect Diagram
Machine Measurement Environment
People Material / Info Method
Budgets
Submitted Late
Lack of experience
Time availability
No sense of import
No stnd spread sheet
Email vs. FedEx
No standard work
Input rec’d late
Forecast in other system
Manual vs. PC
System avail.
No milestones
$ vs. units
Weather delays
Dispersed sales force
Changing schedule
Machine Measurement Environment
People Material / Info Method
Budgets
Submitted Late
Lack of experience
Time availability
No sense of import
No stnd spread sheet
Email vs. FedEx
No standard work
Input rec’d late
Forecast in other system
Manual vs. PC
System avail.
No milestones
$ vs. units
Weather delays
Dispersed sales force
Changing schedule
5 Why’s
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Paret o Chart
Credit Applicat ion Delays
2 9 0 9
6 2 7
5 6 1
2 4 2 1 8 0
2 4 9 3
4 1 %
7 7 %
8 6 %
1 0 0 %
9 7 %
9 4 %
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
N o Si gna t ur e I ns uf f i c i e nt
B a nk I nf o
N o pr i or
a ddr e s s
C ur r e nt
C us t ome r
N o C r e di t
H i s t or y
O t he r
Reason f or Delay
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Check Sheets Quantify Occurrences
|Equipment failure
|||||||||||||Changing customer
requirements w/ no
adjustment to expected
delivery
||||||||||Order entry error
|||Staffing/absenteeism
|||||Quality issue requiring
rework
|||||||Material shortage
TallyReason
|Equipment failure
|||||||||||||Changing customer
requirements w/ no
adjustment to expected
delivery
||||||||||Order entry error
|||Staffing/absenteeism
|||||Quality issue requiring
rework
|||||||Material shortage
TallyReason

17. Future State Design Considerations
 Eliminate steps / handoffs
 Combine steps
 Create parallel paths
 Alter task sequencing
and/or timing
 Implement pull systems
 Reduce / eliminate batches
 Improve quality
 Create an organized, visual
workplace
 Reduce changeover
 Eliminate motion &
transportation
 Standardize work
 Eliminate unnecessary
approvals /
authorizations
 Stop performing non-
value adding (NVA)
tasks
 Co-locate functions
based on flow; create
cells (teams of cross-
functional staff)
 Balance work to meet
takt time requirements
17

18. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Summary Metrics:
Projected Future State Results
18
Metric Current State
Projected
Future State
Projected %
Improvement
Timeline Process Time
Sum
Timeline Lead Time Sum
Activity Ratio
Rolled First Pass Yield
Total Process Time
Labor requirements
Freed capacity (FTEs)

19. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates
Summary Metrics: Labor Requirements
Total PT
 Sum of all activities, not just timeline
Labor Requirements
19
Total PT (in hrs) X # occurrences/year
# FTEs
Available work hrs/year/employee
=
* FTE = Full-time Equivalent (2 half time employees = 1 FTE)
Freed
Capacity
= Current State FTEs – Future State FTEs

20. PACE Improvement Prioritization Grid
High Low
Anticipated Benefit
EaseofImplementation
DifficultEasy
20
7
5
13
4 23
1
228
9
2
10
16
11
6
12
14
19
15
17
3
21
18

21. Value Stream
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
2 Improve quality of referral KE Sean O'Ryan
3, 4
Reduce lead time beween schedulingand
preregistration steps
PROJ
Dianne
Prichard
5, 6
Eliminate the need for two patient check-
ins
KE
Michael
O'Shea
6 Eliminate bottleneck in waiting area KE
Dianne
Prichard
9
Eliminate lead time associated with
transcription step
PROJ Sam Parks
10 Eliminate batched reading KE Sam Parks
7
Reduce inventory costs, regulatory risk
and storage needs
KE
Michael
O'Shea
12 Reduce delay in report delivery PROJ Martha Allen
12 Reduce delay in report delivery KE Martha Allen
Implement voice recognition technology
Reduce setup required
Cross-train and colocate work teams
Implement additional fax ports
Collect copays in Imaging
Balance work / level demand
5S CT supplies area; implement kanban
Value Stream Mapping Facilitator
Increase percentage of physicians
receiving electronic delivery (rather than
hard copy)
Approvals
Executive Sponsor Value Stream Champion
Signature:
Date: Date: Date:
Signature: Signature:
Block
#
Goal / Objective Improvement Activity
Implement standard work for referral
process
Type Owner
Implementation Schedule (weeks) Date
Complete
Date Created
11/21/2007
Allen Ward
Sally McKinsey
Dave Parks 12/13/2007
10/18/2007 1/10/2008
Future State Implementation Plan
Executive Sponsor
Value Stream Champion
Value Stream Mapping Facilitator
Implementation Plan Review Dates
11/1/2007
Outpatient Imaging
Create an Action Plan: Who, What, When, Where, and How?

22. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 22
Metrics-Based Process Mapping:
Three-Part Series
Part 1: Document the current state.
Part 2: Analyze the current state; design
and implement the future state.
Part 3: Document the improved process.

23. © 2010 Karen Martin & Associates 23
Karen Martin, Principal
7770 Regents Road #635
San Diego, CA 92122
858.677.6799
ksm@ksmartin.com
Visit us on Twitter, Linked In,
Facebook, YouTube
For Further Questions