improving trade drafting accuracy & tat - asq · 2017-03-14 · 1 ©2016.eclerx services ltd....

1

©2016.eClerx Services Ltd. An ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Company

IMPROVING TRADE DRAFTING ACCURACY & TAT

Lean Six Sigma Project – By DFX EQD OUTGOING TEAM


2 eClerx at a Glance

Domain. We provide core and critical

services to 80+ global

companies; servicing client

operations on 50+ industry

leading platforms across

500+ business lines

Key Stats

Key Industries

Delivery. We’re recognized for

responsiveness and

accuracy – two critical

attributes for success in

the high velocity, complex

industries we serve

Data. We allow companies to

realize their data as a

strategic asset – streamlining

business processes, driving

innovations and data quality,

and ultimately impacting the

top and bottom line.

Digital Services

Cable and Telecom

Financial Services

Started in 2000, IPO in 2007 on

BSE / NSE

$200mm revenues

80 global clients; 30 in Global F /

FT 500

>8,500 staff in four India delivery

centers

Client centered offices in New

York, London, Philadelphia, Silicon

Valley, Austin, Dublin, Milan,

Munich, Hamburg and Singapore.

2


3 eClerx Verticals

eClerx supports core business processes for its clients

DIGITAL

Services provided to leading global hi-tech,

manufacturing, retail, travel and leisure

enterprises

Services include commerce & content, data

management, analytics & insights & fluid 4

flow workflow solutions

FINANCIAL SERVICES

CABLE & TELECOM

Specialist middle and back office support provided to

world’s largest banks and hedge funds

Asset classes including equity, fixed income, loans,

currencies and commodities supported

Key services include trade documentation,

reconciliations, confirmations, settlements, risk

management and reference data management

Services provided to leading cable, internet and telecom

providers in the US and UK

Services include spend optimization, customer care

monitoring and analytics, quality control on work orders


4 eClerx Financial Services Offering

Operational Support across Asset Classes

Trade Support Trade Entry, Reconciliations, Exceptions Mgmt.

Confirmations Affirmations & Confirmations (Paper & Elec.)

Settlements Settlements, Clearing, Fail Management

Margin Collateral Operations & Portfolio Reconciliation

Asset Servicing Announcements, Corporate Actions, Claims

Tax Operations Tax Form Coding, Cost Basis, Tax Reclaims

Securities Documentation Trading Relationship Document Administration

Finance Financial Accounting, BC&E, Product Control

Reference Data and KYC Client On-boarding, KYC, SSI, Static Data

Risk Management Operations Risk & Control, Regulatory Support

Utility Functions

3


5 Accolades

Analyst Recognition

Service Excellence & Technology

Knowledge Management & Quality

Practices

Organization


6 eClerx Quality Framework

Operation Optimization Framework

Process Excellence

Governance

Risk Assessment

FMEA

Proactively identify and mitigate

failure modes and effects at activity

level

ADAPT

Structured 6 Sigma Project

Management framework

Proactively identify process

improvements and automations

Risk Scan

Evaluates process on risk

associated with Financial, Legal

and Compliance and Operation

Mgmt. aspect

OMF Audit

Focus on 3Ps (People, Performance

and Process)

Assess the execution of process

controls

CTQ

Track process health through

robust metrics

Identify trends and patterns

proactively for risk management

Manager Audit

Process Managers conduct due

diligence audit

Sr. Manager conduct sample

Governance audit to track effectiveness

Six Sigma LEAN

Process Consulting through Structured

Process Improvement projects

Dedicated team of Black Belts and

LEAN Six Sigma experts

eUreka!

Employees log ideas for small scale

process improvements

Best ideas get rewarded on a Quarterly

basis eQuality Framework

4

Project and Team Selection 1


8

1.1.0 | Understanding the Context of Project Selection

1.1.1.1 – Who was responsible for selecting the project?

Client eClerx

Project Approval Committee

Steering Committee

Investment

Banking Director

Investment Banking

Vice President

Ops Associate

Principal

Ops Confirmations

Program Manager

Quality

Head

Ops Confirmations

SME

Quality

Black Belt

UK-based multinational banking firm

with presence in over 50 countries

Shared service partner for

financial services of client

5


9

1.1.0 | Understanding the Context of Project Selection

1.1.1.2 – What background information was provided to better understand the context?

Client Concern

Low T0 Dispatch rate (missing

same day Turn around time)

Threat to Customers

Competitiveness

Low Accuracy

High Rework Time

Dissatisfied Customer

OVERVIEW

Process – In Investment banking, OTC (over-the-counter) derivative contracts traded between two parties without going

through an exchange is quite common. eClerx handles Paper Confirmation process of Equity OTC derivatives as EQD

(equity derivatives) Outgoing in which confirm document is drafted & verified having all crucial trade parameters agreed by

both the parties and then sent across to the client on T0 (Same day Turnaround time)

eClerx Concern


10

1.2.0 | Project Selection Process

1.2.1.1 – How was the gap or opportunity brought to attention of the project identification group?

Client Concern eClerx Concern

Proposal – To improve the T0 Dispatch Rate

Investment Banking

Vice President

Ops Confirmations

Program Manager

Ops Confirmations

SME

Quality

Black Belt

Steering Committee


Low T0 Dispatch rate (missing

same day Turn around time)

Threat to Customers

Competitiveness

Low Accuracy

High Rework Time

Dissatisfied Customer

Investment Banking

Director

Ops Associate

Principal

Quality

Head

6


11


1.2.1.2 & 3 – What was the gap? Which area of the organization had the gap?

Broker

Party A & B approach a 3rd party

– Broker to create a contract

which would act as a legal proof

The Broker fills the pre

decided details on the

system

Booking System

eClerx drafts a Confirm

with the mentioned details

eClerx DFX EQD Drafting team

Workflow System

Once submitted it would flow

in Confirmation Tool

EQD Confirm Drafted

Drafted Confirm is sent

to Party A & B to sign

Party A & B decide to

trade in Equity Derivatives

Party A Party B

@ eClerx

Low T0 Dispatch Rate

Low Accuracy

GAP


12


1.2.2.1 – What data was generated to help select the project?

Data Source Team Output

VOC Customer Low T0 dispatch rate

VOP Operation Low Accuracy

Audit / Error Report FS Metric Missing SLA / Low Accuracy

Employee Feedback HR High Resource Utilization

Investment Banking

Vice President

Ops Confirmations

Program Manager

Ops Confirmations

SME

Quality

Black Belt

Steering Committee

93.5% 93.4% 93.5%

91.8% 91.5% 90.9%

Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-15 Feb-15

Accuracy Trend

7


13


1.2.2.2 – What Methods and / or tools were used to assess the need of the project?

Confirm drafted,

audited & dis patched

Party A & B enter into

contract

Book trade on booking

system Reflects on workflow

Signed by counter

parties

We want all trades confirmation on T0 timelines, it has

an impact downstream and is critical for counter parties VOC

Customer Need statement

Completion of all trades on T0

Measure

Trades confirmation drafted in client

workflow tool on T0

T0 dispatch rate

Current T0

dispatch rate is

LOW

Why T0 dispatch rate is low?

Project CTQ

Low Accuracy

Project y

Big Y

Low TAT Met % High FTNR

Re-Drafting Re-Auditing

Defect Definition Lower

Specification Limit Project Target Project ‘y’ metrics

Output

Characteristics

Any incorrect data point identified

as per audit parameters

95% 99% Accuracy First time right in

all 6 fields

CTQ Drill Down Methods / Tools

Methods /

Tools

In-scope

Re-Work Leads to Leads to Leads to


14


1.2.2.3 – Why were these methods and / or tools used to select the process?

To capture Customer Needs

/ concerns

VOC to be used as input for

CTQ drill down

To convert customer VOCs to a

specific need statement

Assign a measure to Need

statement

Quantify the measure as ‘Big Y’

‘Big Y’ to ‘Project y’

Why VOC? Why CTQ Drill Down?

Low T0 Dispatch Rate

VOC

8


15


1.2.3.1 – What performance measures were the project expected to impact?

T0 Dispatch Rate

TAT Met %

First Time Not Right

Trades are booked but confirms are

not drafted on same day

High Total Time taken from when trade

is booked till the confirm is dispatched

Confirm is incorrectly drafted at the

first time

Trades processed correctly Accuracy

(Average number of daily

confirm dispatched within

T0 timelines)

(Same day confirm draft /

total volumes) * 100

(Total number of incorrect

trades drafted /

Total volume of confirms)

(Total number of confirms

correctly drafted /

Total Confirms processed)

Measures Definition Formula


16


1.2.3.2 – What was the relationship between the stated measures and perceived gap?

Low T0 dispatch rate

Why T0 dispatch rate is low?

‘Stated Measure’

‘Perceived Gap’

Low TAT Met % High FTNR

Defect Definition Lower

Specification Limit Project Target Project ‘y’ metrics Output Characteristics


Re-Work Low Accuracy

Project CTQ

First time not right trade count

is higher.

Average 92% accuracy scores

Project goal now is to maintain an

accuracy score of 99%

Lower Specification Limit is 95%

Accuracy – 92% Target – 99% Re-Work Reduction

Both drafting and auditing

re-work has to be reduced helping

meet the target for T0 dispatch daily

Leads to Leads to Leads to

9


17

93.5% 93.4% 93.5%

91.8% 91.5%

90.9%


Accuracy Trend


1.2.3.3 – What was the Problem / Objective where the organization wanted to be at the end of the project?

Problem Statement The Drafting accuracy of DFX EQD

Outgoing process has only been ~92%

and thereby impacting the T0 timelines

Goal Statement To increase current drafting

accuracy of DFX EQD Outgoing

from ~92% to 99% by August 2015


18

1.3.0 | Team Selection & Preparation

1.3.1.1 – How were the stakeholder groups identified?

@ eClerx end

Low T0 dispatch rate

Low TAT Met

% High FTNR

Quality

Program office for all process

improvement initiatives

Responsible for creation of process

improvement culture @ eClerx

Acts as Facilitator & Mentor

@ Client end


Re-Work

Enabling Teams

Responsible for Technical,

MIS & training project needs

Support for budgetary

requirements

Confirmation Operations

Responsible for EQD DFX

operations

Operation expertise

Responsible for project

execution

FS Management as Stakeholders

Being the Sponsor @ eClerx end

Client counter-part @ eClerx end

Approver authority @ eClerx end

Client as Stakeholder

As the project had a direct impact

@ client side

Dependency on client for approvals

Involvement as partner for key

decision making

Low Accuracy Leads to Leads to Leads to

10


19

Investment Banking Director(client),

Ops Associate Principal, Quality Head

Selecting resources from

Confirmation cluster (Ops & Quality)

responsible to drive the Accuracy

project

Investment Banking Vice President (client),

Ops Confirmation Program Manager, Ops

Confirmation SME & BB

Ensuring Project goal of 99% accuracy

is achieved

Selecting resources from Ops & Quality

to execute the project

Reviewing the progress of the project

through regular tollgates

Ops DFX EQD Senior Process Manager,

Ops DFX EQD Process Manager,

Process improvement expert, FS Metric,

IT, Knowledge Management, Finance.

Execution of project by defining

the goal,

making measurement plan, identifying

drivers, developing solutions, making

control chart, monitoring progress and

sustaining the improvement.

Presenting the accuracy project to the

stakeholders during scheduled

tollgates


1.3.1.2 – What or who were the stakeholders group?


Steering Committee Project Team



20


1.3.2.1 – What knowledge / skill were determined to be necessary for project? 1.3.2.2 – To what extent did the stakeholder groups have required knowledge / skill?

Need Primary Role

Confirmation

Expert

Process

Improvement

Expert

Quality

Consultant

Ops Confirmation SME has complete

knowledge about confirmation cluster

Quality Strategic consultant -BB has

mastered the DMAIC framework

Quality Transactional consultant is an

Audit expert

Ops DFX EQD Champion is the process

expert and can resolve query about it

DFX EQD

Process

Expert

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK – Process Knowledge QK – Quality Knowledge P Practitioner F Facilitator

F

P

P

F

F

P

F

P

11


21


1.3.2.3 – What additional knowledge / skill were brought in to make the project successful?

FS Metric

Knowledge

Management

Finance

Team

MIS Expert

Training and Documentation Expert

Cost Benefit Valuation Expert

Technology Expert Information

Technology

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK –

QK –

PK – Process Knowledge QK – Quality Knowledge P Practitioner F Facilitator

F

P

F

P

P

P

F

P

Need Additional Role Knowledge Level


22


1.3.3.1 – Before the project started, what specific training was done?

7Quality Tools Understanding the

basic tools like

Pareto, Run &

Control Chart etc.

01

2 hours

Lean To create an

understanding of deep

diving into the process

from VA and NVA

perspective 8 hours

02

Confirmation Cluster To create high level

common understanding

about the Confirmation

Drafting cluster

10 hours

03

DFX EQD Process To create high level

common understanding

about the process

including the client

platforms used

12 hours

04

DMAIC Understand the

DMAIC framework

and Tools

24 hours

05

12


23


1.3.3.2 – Before the project started, what was done to prepare the team to work together?

Gemba Walk 6 hours Used by the project team to see

the as is process on the floor

Strength, Team work, Alignment & Result Technique 8 hours Used by the project team to discuss the

desired result, existing strengths of

members, & alignment of work

accordingly with team building exercise

Focus Group Discussion 2 hours Used by the steering

committee to discuss the

main concern of the project


24


1.3.4.1 – What roles & expectations were determined ahead of the project?

Resources Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Investment Banking Director (Client)

Ops Principal

Quality Head

Project Champion

Project Lead

Team Members

FS Metrics

IT Team

Informed Approver Consultant Accountable Responsible

13


25


1.3.4.1 – What deadlines & deliverables did the team have to consider ahead of starting the project?


26


1.3.4.3 – Before the project started what team routines / communication were established?

Progress Review Meeting

Tollgate Review

Project Update Mails

Working Sessions

Communication Plan Frequency Attendees Chair Person

Monthly Project Team Black Belt

Based on Charter

Milestone

Steering committee &

Project team Black Belt

Weekly Approval & Steering

committee Black Belt

Alternate days Project Team Black Belt

14

Current Situation and Root Cause / Improvement Opportunity Analysis

2


28

2.1.0 | Key Measures of the Project

2.1.1.1 – What specific goals and / or measures was the team trying to achieve with the project

93.5% 93.4% 93.5% 91.8% 91.5% 90.9%


Accuracy Trend Opportunity to Reduce

Increasing trend for errors for

trades drafted in system

Errors for trades drafted

Re-Work Time

Low Accuracy

15


29

Better resource utilization in DFX Operations will

help in planning more domain related trainings for

skill improvement

Standardized process for drafting trades in Equity

Derivatives team will help the new joiners learn

quickly during the on job training phase

Equity Derivatives 2nd level checkers /auditors will get more audit time to

work among themselves to improve repeatability and reproducibility

With better systems in place, risk for errors reduces specially

financial risks, which may end up as penalty for eClerx

More analytical reports like, trader details, counter party specific,

geo wise data can be involved helping the DFX Ops and the

sales team to reach out to the potential customers for eClerx

With better agent utilization, more cross skill

trainings can be planned and the skills of the

resources can be used to support different type of

trades helping the change in work monotony

The utilization number which is ranging from 120% to

130% in DFX Operations team, will be improved and

agents will not have to extend their shifts

With apt resource utilization the drafting team will be able to dispatch more trades on

the systems without needing the buffer time, leading to scope for more work

With 100% T0 trades throughput the customer satisfaction

will be enhanced day after day generating good business

and scope for more work Optimized

Agent

Utilization in

DFX Process

Cross Skill

Opportunity

in DFX

Process

More

Analytical

Reports in

EQD

Process Less Risk

in DFX

Process

More

Audit time

in EQD

Process

Standardized

Process for

Derivatives

Employee

Satisfaction In

DFX Process

Customer

Satisfaction

in EQD

Outgoing

Process

Capacity

Improvement

in DFX

Process

Capacity

Improvement

in DFX

Process

2.1.0 | Key Measures of the Project

2.1.1.2 – What additional potential benefits, other than specific goals and / or measures was the project expected to impact?

Additional Benefits In DFX Process


30

2.2.0 | Possible Root Causes / Improvement Opportunities

2.2.1.1 – What methods and / or tools were used to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities?

Process Overview (DFX Process)

Focus Group Discussions with Equity team

Multi-voting for Control Impact Analysis in DFX 3

i

1

ii

2

SWIMLANE

ISHIKAWA

CONTROL IMPACT

PARETO

HYPOTHESIS TESTING

5 WHY iii

Prioritizing Causes

Vital few & Root Cause

16


31


2.2.1.2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected (to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities?)

3

i

1

ii

2

SWIMLANE

ISHIKAWA

CONTROL IMPACT

PARETO

HYPOTHESIS TESTING

5 WHY iii

What Tools

Operational Definition (DFX Process)

Focus Group Discussions with Equity team

Multi-voting for Control Impact Analysis in DFX

Prioritizing Root Cause

Vital few & Root Cause and Validation

To understand the upstream and downstream impact

Use all knowledge to identify all responsible X’s

Identify high control and high impact reasons

Understand the impact and prioritize the X’s

Identify the important few root causes

Methods Why??


32


2.2.1.3 – 2.2.1.3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools (to identify possible root causes / improvement opportunities)

CONTROL IMPACT 3

5 WHY 4

ISHIKAWA 1

SWIMLANE 2

Informed

Client was informed about the progress in

the project

Workshop

Management along with the Ops team was

involved in the brainstorming workshop

Trained

Project lead and team members were

trained on lean and Six-Sigma concepts

Sessions

Multiple sessions were conducted to

practice the process mapping and

activities learned during workshops

Pre-Requisite

For BBs it is a mandate to be certified on

Lean and Six-Sigma Concepts

Quality Culture

Team

Members Stakeholder Client Quality BB

Governance

Work Shops / Sessions, Project Specific Trainings -(QC, Lean, GB)

Informed

Workshop

Sessions

Trained

Trained

Pre-

Requisite

Trained

Trained

Trained

Trained

3

4

1

2

4 5

1 2

3

5

1

2 3

PARETO 5

Trained 4

17


33


2.2.2.1 – What data was generated and how was the data analysed to identify the possible root causes / improvement opportunities?

Employee

Feedback

Audit Report

Dashboard

Error Report

VOP

VOC

Agent Utilization average was

ranging from 120-130% for Q1

HR aligned with

Confirmations Team

High agent utilization data was

captured

Error types and agent wise error log FS Metric Team Accuracy detailed data was audited

to see the opportunity areas

Team wise Accuracy report was

generated (Most of them were <93%) FS Metric Team

RAG Status and concern teams

were selected

Controllable errors list was prepared

(7 categories identified) FS Metric Team

Error trend and category wise data

was made available

Re-work leading to high agent

utilization, an average of >120% DFX Operations

Concern from all stakeholders on

re-work was collated

Customer Customer feedback captured from

MBRs

Customer concerns on Low T0

throughput expressed in MBRs & calls

What Data Source Analysis

R E

P O

R T

S


34

Human Miss-outs

Investigation Incomplete

Formatting Issues

Missing Client

Exceptions

No Refresher Trainings

Template Understanding

More Manual Work 1

2

3 4

5

6

7

Influential Factor

High Low Medium


2.2.2.2 – What were the possible root causes / improvement opportunities?

18


35

2.3.0 | Final Root Cause(s) / Improvement Opportunity(ies)

2.3.1.1 – What methods or tools were used to identify the final root cause(s) / improvement opportunity(ies)?

Data Door Analysis

Tools Used

Pareto Analysis

5 Why

Control Impact

Affinity Diagram

Hypothesis Testing

Inference

Main causes identified leading to low

T0 dispatch rate

Low Accuracy reasons identified

(Avg. 92%)

Statistically significant opportunities

identified

Process Door Analysis

Tools Used

SIPOC

FMEA

Swimlane

Value Stream Mapping

Inference

Process Controls

Kaizen bursts

Process cycle efficiency


36


2.3.1.2 – Why were these methods and / or tools selected (to identify the final root cause(s) / improvement opportunity(ies))?

Data Door Analysis

Process Door

Analysis

Tools Used

5 WHY / RCA

Affinity Diagram, FMEA

and Control Impact Matrix

Pareto and Hypothesis testing

SIPOC

Swimlane

Value Stream mapping

Why

5 Brainstorming with the team to identify root causes

Affinity diagram helped in segmenting the causes,

FMEA helped in prioritizing high risk areas, and

Control Impact Matrix helped in filtration

Ensuring fact based approach, by prioritizing the

causes and statistically validating the same

Broad Level Process understanding for all stakeholders

Upstream and downstream of the process and

responsible areas and stakeholders identified

Process Cycle Efficiency was calculated

19


37


2.3.1.3 – How was the team prepared to use these methods and / or tools (to identify the final root causes / improvement opportunity(ies))?

Data Door Analysis

Process Door

Analysis

Tools Used

5 WHY / RCA

Affinity Diagram

FMEA and Control Impact Matrix

DPMO

Pareto and Hypothesis Testing

3

4

1

5

2

SIPOC

Swimlane

Value Stream mapping 3

1

2

Informed

Client was informed about the progress

in the project

Workshop

Management along with the Ops team

was involved in the brainstorming

workshop

Trained

Project lead and team members were


Sessions

Multiple sessions were conducted to

practice the process mapping and

activities learned during workshops

Pre-Requisite

For BBs it is a mandate to be certified on

Lean and Six-Sigma Concepts

Tools used were grouped into 5 categories and were included

accordingly in the sessions, trainings and work shops

Quality Culture

Team


Governance

Work Shops / Sessions, Project Specific Trainings – (OC, Lean, GB)

Informed

Workshop

Sessions

Trained

Trained

Pre-

Requisite

Trained

Trained

Trained

Trained

3

4

1

2 3

4

1 2

3

4

1

2

5

Trained 5


38


2.3.2.1 – What data was generated and how was the data analyzed in order to identify the final root cause(s) / improvement opportunity(ies)?

Data Collection Plan

Prioritized the X’s High Impact & High Control X’s validated Validation Using Hypothesis

Daily Weekly Fortnight Monthly Yearly

Data Collection Strategy

Auditor Calibration Data

20


39


2.3.2.2 – What are specific examples of data analysis that led to the final root cause?

Prioritized the X’s

Validation Using Hypothesis

Failure Mode and Effect Analysis


40


2.3.2.3 – What was / were the final root cause(s) / improvement opportunity(ies)?

Human

Miss-outs

Investigation

Incomplete

Formatting

Issues

Missing Client

Exceptions

No Refresher

Trainings

Template

Understanding

More Manual

Work 1

2

3 4

5

6

7

Influential Factor

High Low Medium

Tools

Used

Final

Root

Causes

(HIF)

1 Manual Work leading to errors

2 No trainings due to Overutilization

3 Lack of information to investigate

4 Standardized Process Missing

21


41


2.3.3.1 – How was / were the final root causes / improvement opportunity(ies) validated?

Final

Root

Causes

(HIF)

1

2

3

4

Manual Work

leading to errors

No trainings due

to Overutilization

Lack of

information to

investigate

Standardized

Process Missing


42

2.4.0 | Project Management Update

2.4.1.1 – How was the correctness of the initial project scope, deliverables, and timing confirmed (or, what changes were made)?

Low Accuracy

C. T. Q

.

Client

Ops Leadership

Quality Team Steering

Committee

governance

22


43

Change tracker

MOMs

Project Slide Reviews

Emails

Sticky Notes

Audit Observations

System Changes


2.4.1.2 – How were stakeholders involved and / or communicated with during the root cause / improvement opportunity phase of the project?

Project

Team

Members

Quality BB

Steering

Committee

Client

Informed on the project status

during MBRs, meetings

Approval on project plans

Toll Gate reviews / approvals

Cost and Benefit checks

Periodically meetings

Training / Meeting team members

Validating Scope / measurements

Data Analysis

Cost Benefit Analysis

Implement Improvements / solutions

Dashboards

Audits / QC checks

Meetings / trainings

governance


44


2.4.1.3 – What stakeholder resistance was identified and / or addressed in this phase of the project?

Bottleneck

Overburdened team

Up skilling resources

Stakeholder Observed Resistance

Ops team

Employee

MIS

Client Limited scope for improvement

Confirmations Process Specific

Return On Investment

Resource bandwidth

Historical Report not handy

Discomfort for loss of job in case of

process change

Lack of skills to manage redesigned process

Lack of bandwidth to support BAU and pilot

Resource knowledge to support new process

trainings

The bandwidth to support effort required

training / workshops

Type of Resistance

Employee Satisfaction

23


45


2.4.1.4 – How was the appropriateness of the initial team membership and management routines confirmed (or what changes were made)?

Required Skills

Additional Skills

Subject matter expert for

confirmations process

Steering Committee

Project Selection

committee

Ops / Program Manager

Quality Methodologies

IT Solutions Resource

Finance Team for

benefit analysis

Process Knowledge

Facilitator

Facilitator

Practitioner

Practitioner

Facilitator

Practitioner

Facilitator

Facilitator

Roles

Product cluster SME

Knowledge Management

Quality-Strategic

Quality-Transactional

Champion

FS Metric

Ops Communication Team

IT Team

Why / Need

Domain expert

Documentation Expert

Process Improvement Experts

Quality Consultants

Process Expertise

MIS

Client & CP Communication

Technology Expert

Quality Knowledge

Practitioner

Practitioner

Facilitator

Facilitator

Practitioner

Practitioner

Practitioner

Practitioner

Ops Associate

Principal

Quality

Head

Ops Confirmations

Program Manager

Ops Confirmations

SME

Quality

Black Belt


Solution / Improvement Development

3

24


47

Focus group discussions done with Confirmation Ops SME and Project team to address the Root Causes

Identified solutions were segmented in buckets i.e. Automation, Skill development / training and Standardization by applying affinity diagram

Prioritized and selected High weightage solutions through multi-voting with Confirmation operation team, Confirmation SME and IT

Feasibility analysis done based on few critical parameters and impacts i.e.

Availability / requirement of resources (skills) & technology, Cost & ROI, Stakeholder buy-in, Controls etc.

3.1.0 | Possible Solutions or Improvements

3.1.1.1 – What methods or tools were used to identify the possible solutions(s) / improvement(s)?

Final

Root

Causes

(HIF)

1

2

3

4

Manual Work

leading to errors

Standardized

Process issues

Lack of

information to

investigate

No trainings due

to Overutilization

Focus Group Segmentation Multi-Voting Feasibility study

4 Possible Solutions Identified

Focus Group Segmentation Multi-Voting Feasibility Study


48


3.1.1.2 – Why were these methods or tool selected?

To include all key stakeholders

To generate Ideas

To Set Consensus

Sorting

To simplify To set in order

To filter

To Select

Brainstorming

To generate the best possible

solutions

To assign solutions to each

final root causes

To set consensus between

confirmation Ops Teams,

Stakeholders, IT on possible

solutions

Bifurcation in Key Categories

Finalizing Key categories like

automation route,

Standardization etc.

Clubbing all possible solution

in a defined category to

simplify

Prioritization

Set in order

Sequence based on voting

Business Environment Viability

To select most viable

solutions considering few

factors based on impact

analysis

– ROI

– Required skills

& technology

– Stakeholder buy-in

– Controls

Focus Group Segmentation Multi-Voting Feasibility study Focus Group Segmentation Multi-Voting Feasibility Study

4 Possible Solutions Identified

25


49


3.1.1.3 – How was the team prepared to use the methods and / or tools?

Multi Voting 3

Feasibility Study 4

Focused Group

Discussions 1

Segmentation

(Affinity Diagram) 2

Informed


the project

Workshop

Stakeholders along with team members

was involved in various workshop

Trained

Stakeholders and team members were


Facilitator

Pre Requisite for BBs to be trained and

have expertise on said tools

BBs used as facilitators to conduct these

trainings cum sessions

Quality Culture

Team


Governance

Work Shops, Project Specific trainings

Informed

Workshop

Trained

Workshop

Workshop

Pre-

Requisite

Facilitator

Workshop

Trained

Workshop

Workshop

3

4

1

2

3 4

1 2

3

4

1

2


50


3.1.2.1 – What data was generated and how was the data analyzed to determine the possible solution(s) / improvement(s)?

Tools How

Brainstorming to identify possible solutions for EQD operation

process which has:

– Process steps highly prone to error

– No standardization observed

– High variation in individual and team performance

Simplifying the solutions by segmentation of possible solutions i.e.

– Automation – To resolve repetitive and error prone steps

– Trainings- To cover exceptions and all possible scenarios

– Standardization – Of templates, SOPs etc.

Possible solutions were set in order through Multi-voting

– Automation approach – Critical and high effort

– SOPs, Refreshers and SKTs (Skills Knowledge Test) to cover

standardization and Skills (Sort term and quick fixes)

Possible solutions were filtered by checking viability basis

– RPA Roboworx (Robotic Process Automation) and impact on

Global used platform

– Cost of build and ROI etc.

Measure

Manual Process steps

Error Prone process steps

Availability of SOPs

Adherence of SOPs

Agent Performance Vs.

tenure, Skills, utilization etc.

Focus Group

Discussions

Segmentation

Multi- Voting

Feasibility Study

26


51


3.1.2.2 – What are the possible solutions / Improvements

Possible Solutions

RPA Roboworx (Robotic Process Automation)

– RPA Roboworx over client platform

– To optimize 80% efforts & avoid errors

– Logic build to clone trades from identical

trades processed in past

Refresher Training

– To cover most of the Counter Partner

exception

– Client Booking system

Standardization (SOP Creation)

– Term sheet and Client Workflow

– Templates used

Automation

Training

Standardization Final Root causes

Manual work

leading to errors

No Training due

to Overutilization

Formatting

issues

Lack of information

to investigate

1

2 3

4


52

3.2.0 | Final Solutions or Improvements

3.1.2.3 – What evidence showed that validation was performed prior to implementation?

Possible Solutions

RPA Roboworx (Robotic Process Automation)

– RPA Roboworx over client platform

– To optimize 80% efforts & avoid errors

– Logic build to clone trades from identical

trades processed in past

Refresher Training

– To cover most of the Counter Partner

exception

– Client Booking system

Standardization (SOP Creation)

– Term sheet and Client Workflow

– Templates used

Automation

Training

Standardization

W1 W2 W3 W4 W5

Pre Pilot – Test 1

Possible Solution

Refinement

P

D

C

A

Process Re-certification Scores

Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 5

Team 2 7 2

Team 3 7 8

1 10

Knowledge Based Solution

• Trainings have shown some

improvement

• However the movement was not

evident for all the teams

Further refinement to cover critical process

scenarios

Standardization and automation

• Error trend was significantly controlled

• But SOPs were to be further refined

covering almost all exceptions

and scenarios

Test Re-test for Solutions

Scale

27


53


3.2.1.1 – What methods or tools were used to identify the final solutions / improvements?

Purpose: To align the final solutions to business goals

Team: Quality team, Operational Team and Stakeholders

Final Solutions

Refining Solution

To refine the solutions Focus Group Discussion,

Segmentation, Multi-voting and feasibly study done

Testing Solution

To validate the solutions Pre Pilot Test -1 is done by:

– Error Trend analysis

– Training and recertification

To further refine the solutions PDCA cycle approach is

followed and test retest is done on solutions by re-

validating training and certification scores, Error Trend

and process standardization

Further

Refining

Solutions

Pre Pilot – Test 1

Possible Solution

Refinement

P

D

C

A

W1 W2 W3 W4 W5


Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 5

Team 2 7 2

Team 3 7 8

SOPs covering all exceptions

and scenarios

More reliable and cost

effective Automation

Refine

Solutions Plan and Design Solution

Test Solutions

Check the results

Test Re-test solutions

1 10 Scale


54


3.2.1.2 – Why were these methods or tools used to determine the final solutions or improvements?

Strategy Method / Tools Why?

To refine the solutions Focus Group

Discussion, Segmentation, Multi-voting

and feasibly study done

To validate the solutions Pre Pilot Test – 1

is done by:

– Error Trend analysis

– Training and recertification

To further refine the solutions PDCA cycle

approach is followed and test retest is

done on solutions by re-validating training

and certification scores, Error Trend and

process standardization

To determine or select the final solutions we used

strategy of

– Refining

– Testing

– Further refinement if needed

To deploy the strategy we used

– Brainstorming

– PDCA and Pre and Post comparison

Based on results we observed

– We identified need to further refine Trainings

and SOPs

– As there were multiple exceptions, agents

were unable to capture

Focus Group Discussions

PDCA

Pre and Post Comparison

Refining Solution

Testing Solution

Further

Refining

Solutions

Final Solutions

28


55


3.2.1.3 – How was the team prepared to use the method s or tools?

Pre & Post

Comparison 3

Focused Group

Discussions 1

PDCA 2

Quality Culture

Team


Governance

Work Shops, Project Specific trainings

Informed

Workshop

Trained

Training /

Workshop

Pre-

Requisite

Facilitator

Workshop

Trained

Training /

Workshop 3

1

2

3

1 2

3

1

2

Informed


the project

Workshop

Stakeholders along with team members

was involved in various workshop

Trained

Stakeholders and team members were


Facilitator

Pre Requisite for BBs to be trained and

have expertise on said tools

BBs used as facilitators to conduct these

trainings cum sessions


56


3.2.2.1 – Why were these methods or tools used to determine the final solutions or improvements?

Method / Tools Pre Pilot – Test 1 How?

Further

Refining

Solutions

Final Solutions

Focus Group Discussions

PDCA


Focus Group Discussion done to

determine the final solutions as

counter measures

PDCA

– Error trend analyses done on

week on week data to compare

the error rate which shows

downward trend


– Week on week Training and

Error trend scores are being

compared

Possible Solution

Refinement

P

D

C

A

W1 W2 W3 W4 W5


Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 5

Team 2 7 2

Team 3 7 8

1 10

SOPs covering all

exceptions and scenarios



Refine


Test Solutions

Check the results


Scale

29


57


3.2.2.2 – What are the final solutions or improvements?

Clone Tracker

Introduced as a work around

Much Economical solution

No interaction with Client

platform

Process steps highly

error prone

Creating database for

processed trades

Database can be used

for cloning purposes

1. Automation

Standardization of and

Client workflow

Creation and

implementation of SOP

2. Standardization

Training to cover trade

exceptions

Training on Client

Booking system

3. Training


58


3.2.3.1 – How were the final solutions or improvements validated?

Method / Tools Pre Pilot – Test 2

Fin

al

So

luti

on

s

Possible Solution

Refinement

P

D

C

A


Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 7

Team 2 7 5

Team 3 7 8

1 10

SOPs covering all

exceptions and scenarios



Refine


Test Solutions

Check the results


How?

Error trend for Extended weeks was

used for validation of improving trend

Process recertification scores

validated for teams to check the

Process Knowledge and relevance of

new trainings

Standard Operating procedures were

created to cover all possible

exceptions / scenarios

– These SOPs were validated by

Confirmation SME and approved

by Client partner

Process steps which are

highly error prone


processed trades



1. Automation


Client workflow

Creation and


2. Standardization


exception

Training on Client

Booking system

1. Training

W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8

Scale

30


59


3.2.3.2 – What evidence showed that validation was performed prior to implementation?

Refining solutions based on PDCA and

Test Retest approaches

Continuous reducing Error trend for 6

weeks

Observed significant improvement in

Process knowledge based on the

training and knowledge tests

Completed 100% documentation and

created SOPs covering all exceptions

and scenarios

This has collectively resulted in reducing

errors and Improving Accuracy

W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8


Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 7

Team 2 7 5

Team 3 7 9

Possible Solution

Refinement

P

D

C

A

Knowledge Based Sol • Trainings have shown some

improvement • However the movement was not

evident for all the teams Further refinement to cover critical process scenarios Standardization and automation • Error trend was significantly controlled • But SOPs were to be further refined

covering almost all exceptions and scenarios

Test Re-test for Solutions

1 10 Scale

Method / Tools Pre Pilot – Test 2 What?

Fin

al

So

luti

on

s

Process steps which are

highly error prone


processed trades



1. Automation


Client workflow

Creation and


2. Standardization


exception

Training on Client

Booking system

1. Training


60




Equity Derivatives 2nd level checkers / auditors will get more audit time

to work among themselves to improve repeatability and reproducibility


3.2.4.1 – What additional potential benefits were anticipated from the final solutions or improvements?

Capacity

Improvement

in DFX

Process

Customer

Satisfaction

in EQD

Outgoing

Process

Employee

Satisfaction In

DFX Process

More

Analytical

Reports in

EQD

Process

Cross Skill

Opportunity

in DFX

Process

Optimized

Agent

Utilization in

DFX Process

Less Risk

in DFX

Process

More

Audit time

in EQD

Process

Standardized

Process for

Derivatives

Additional Benefits















With 100% T0 trades throughput the

customer satisfaction will be enhanced day

after day generating good business and

scope for more work

Better resource utilization in DFX

Operations will help in planning

more domain related trainings for

skill improvement

In DFX Process

31


61


3.2.4.2 – Were the additional potential benefits anticipated prior to implementation?

Capacity

Improvement

in DFX

Process

Customer

Satisfaction

in EQD

Outgoing

Process

Employee

Satisfaction In

DFX Process

More

Analytical

Reports in

EQD

Process

Cross Skill

Opportunity

in DFX

Process

Optimized

Agent

Utilization in

DFX Process

Less Risk

in DFX

Process

More

Audit time

in EQD

Process

Standardized

Process for

Derivatives

Additional Benefits

Better resource utilization in DFX

Operations will help in planning

more domain related trainings for

skill improvement




Equity Derivatives 2nd level checkers /auditors will get more audit time to

work among themselves to improve repeatability and reproducibility















With 100% T0 trades throughput the

customer satisfaction will be enhanced day

after day generating good business and

scope for more work

In DFX Process


62


3.2.5.1 – What data was generated and how was the data analysed to justify why the chosen final solutions(s) / improvement(s) should be implemented?

Data Tools How

Hypotheses Testing

Control Chart


Hypotheses testing

– P-value is 0.00 (<.05), shows that

refined solution has significant impact

on error rate

Control Chart

– Error trend analysis done by control

chart shows that error rate has gone

down significantly


– Week on week training and

certification scores were compared to

validate the improvement

Error Count data

Training certification scores

– Training certification pre and post

pilot test

32


63


3.2.5.2 – What evidence showed that justification was performed prior to implementation?

Pilot Phase

Success

Test and CI for Two-Sample Poisson Rates: Number of

Errors_Pre Project, Number of Errors Improve Phase

Total Rate of

Variable Occurrences N Occurrence

No. of Errors_Pre Project 291 9 32.3333

No. of Errors Improve Phase 25 9 2.7778

Difference = rate(Number of Errors_Pre Project) - rate(Number of

Errors Improve Phase)

Estimate for difference: 29.5556

95% CI for difference: (25.6843, 33.4268)

Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = 14.96 P-Value = 0.000

Exact Test: P-Value = 0.000


Teams Certification

Scores

Re-certification

Scores

Team 1 6 8

Team 2 7 8

Team 3 7 9

1 10 Scale

Prior Holistic Implementation

Buy-in was obtained from all stakeholders

Final Approval by Operation Head and Quality

Head

Chi-Square Goodness-of-Fit Test for Observed Counts in Variable: Number of Errors

Using category names in Project Phase

Test Contribution

Category Observed Proportion Expected to Chi-Sq

Pre Project 291 0.5 158 111.956

Improve Phase 25 0.5 158 111.956

N DF Chi-Sq P-Value

316 1 223.911 0.000

APPROVED


64


3.3.1.1 – How was the appropriateness of the initial or update team membership and management routines confirmed (or what changes were made)?

33


65


3.3.1.2 – How were stakeholders involved and / or communicated within the solution / improvement phase of the project?

Resources Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Investment Banking

Director (Client)

Ops Principal

Quality Head

Project Champion

Project Lead

Team Members

FS Metrics

IT Team

Informed

Approver

Consultant Accountable

Responsible

Communi-cation Plan

Progress Review Meeting

Tollgate Review

Project Update mails

Team Meet

Frequency

Monthly

Based on Charter

Milestone

Weekly

Alternate days

Attendees

Champion, Mentor, lead, Quality Head

Sponsor, Champion,

Mentor, Lead, Quality head

Sponsor, Champion,

Quality head

Mentor, Lead, Team

Members Stakeholders

involvement and

communication plan


66


3.3.1.3 – What stakeholder resistance was identified and / or address in this phase of the project?

Approach to Address Resistance

Major – Threat to project

Minor – Quick Fix

Capture the specific concern

Plan to resolve

Resistance conversion to Specific concerns

Solve concern

Eliminate Concerns

Segment Resistance

Plan for Resistance

Resolve the Concerns

Client

Impact on global platform

Technology solution proposed has an

impact on globally used client platform

Cost of implementation globally was

very high

Employee

Discomfort


process change

Finance

Budget Constraints

High consumption rate vs. Budget limit

Return on Investment

Uncertainty on Return On Investment

For RPA finance refrained from

project due to:

High cost of implementation

Low return on Investment

RPA solution was to be built and deployed at eClerx end Superimposition of RPA

changes at Client platform High cost of implementation

at client end High risk of making changes

at client end

Addressing Concerns

A new solution i.e. ‘Clone tracker’

design with no impact on client

platform

Less or no cost of implementation

due to clone tracker

Managers & skip level discussion

to create trust and assurance

HR BP involvement to conduct

awareness sessions on change

Transparent guidelines on

performance linked benefits

IT / Tech team presented cost

and effort calculations for new

automated solution ‘Clone tracker‘

to Finance

Revised CBA addressed ROI

related concerns

CLO

NE

TR

AC

KE

R

CLO

NE

TR

AC

KE

R

34


67


3.3.1.4 – How was the appropriateness of the initial or update team membership and management routines confirmed (or what changes were made)?

Required Skills

Additional Skills

Subject matter expert for

confirmations process

Steering Committee

Project Selection

committee

Ops / Program Manager

Quality Methodologies

IT Solutions Resource

Finance Team for

benefit analysis

Process Knowledge

Facilitator

Facilitator

Practitioner

Practitioner

Facilitator

Practitioner

Facilitator

Facilitator

Roles

Product cluster SME

Knowledge Management

Quality-Strategic

Quality-Transactional

Champion

FS Metric

Ops Communication Team

IT Team

Reason

Domain expert

Documentation Expert

Process Improvement Experts

Quality Consultants

Process Expertise

MIS

Client & CP Communication

Technology Expert

Quality Knowledge

Practitioner

Practitioner

Facilitator

Facilitator

Practitioner

Practitioner

Practitioner

Practitioner

Ops Associate

Principal

Quality

Head

Ops Confirmations

Program Manager

Ops Confirmations

SME

Quality

Black Belt


Implementation and Results Verification

4

35


69

4.1.0 | Stakeholder Consideration in Implementation

4.1.1.1 – How were stakeholders involved in planning the solutions / improvement implementation?

Stakeholders

Design Section Pilot Section Holistic Deployment

Provide VOC

Provide Data

Provide Need Statement

Review findings

Suggest Changes

Approve findings

Review and Approve Findings

Review Approach /

counter measures

Approve counter

measures

Review & Approve

Solutions Design

Approve Pilot in-scope

area

Review and approve

Pilot plan

Review & Approve Pilot Phase Plan

Review pilot results

Provide approval on

Pilot Phase output

Review & Approve Pilot Phase output

Holistic

Deployment

Based on

successful pilot

Clone Tracker Increased

Accuracy

Pilot results

Reduced errors

Cloning resulted

in effort saving

IT

Operations

Confirmation

Operations Quality IB Client

Confirmation

Operations IB Client

IT

Operations Quality Finance

Confirmation

Operations Client

Tech Solutions

Focused on

Mistake proofing

and effort saving

Approve Final Solutions

Approve Holistic

implementation plan

Approve Holistic Implementation

Key Needs

Capturing Needs

Fact based approach

and Data gathering

Signoff on Captured

needs

Key Proposals

Scoping for Process

Restructuring and

Reengineering

Automation

Assessment

Resource / skills

assessment

Key Approaches

Finalized Scope

Finalized Automation

approach

Approval for Trainings &

workshops plan

Pilot Plan

Finalized Pilot Plan

Finalized in-scope pilot

area

Approval pilot goals for

success

Pilot Results

Report-out Pilot

success w.r.t. defined

goals

Approval on final report

and outcomes

Pilot success report out

Holistic Deployment

Approved holistic

implementation plan

Finalized Success

measures

– ROI

– Improved controls


70


4.1.1.2 – How were stakeholders involved in planning the solutions / improvement implementation?

Being a high impact project there was a continuous need to involve

stakeholders from the perspective of Change Management,

Governance and Approvals ADKAR approach helped us in below

benefits

Timely approvals

Streamline implementation with low or no resistance

Satisfied customer and key stakeholders

ADKAR

Governance

Daily Review

report-out

Stakeholder

Weekly Review on

Solution

Implementation

plan and status

Change Management

Regular updates

from Stakeholders

to the organization

– To Support

Change

– To motivate

change

– To Strategize

Approvals

Approvals for all

key deliverables of

a project

Approval on

Success of project

Roles of Stakeholders

Approvers Sponsors Mentors

Strategize Motivate Teamwork Resolve Resistance

Change Managers

36


71


4.1.2.1 – What was done to anticipate resistance before it occurred?

Being a high impact project there was a continuous need to involve stakeholders from the perspective

of Change Management, governance and approvals. ADKAR approach helped us in below benefits

Strong communication strategy to avoid any resistance

– Structured communication to spread awareness on the need of ‘Change’

– Involvement of Key Stakeholders

Satisfied customers and key

stakeholders

Timely approvals

Action

ADKAR A

D K

A

R Awareness

Desire

Reinforcement

Knowledge

Step 1

Identification of key Stakeholders

IB Clients

Confirmation Operations

FS IT (Technology)

eClerx Finance

FS Quality

FS Trainings Team

FS Metric Team

Step 2

Communication strategy at every key phase

Accuracy Project Initiation communication

Risk / Issue log reporting

Pilot phase communication for respective

teams and stakeholders

Communication of final results

Step 5

Agreement on results and critical outcomes

Clone Tracker deployment

ROI validation and benefit signoff

from Finance

Process improvement validation

by Quality

Validated improvements approval from

client and internal stakeholders

Step 4

Key deliverables and resource allocation

Mapping resources at each key

deliverables

Setting up a Program office to govern

the overall initiative

Step 3

Creating Forums with IB client, Confirmation Ops and other stakeholders

To set a common understanding regarding change

Steering Committee review

Phase-wise status review

Tollgate signoffs

Workshops and Training updates



72


Minor – Quick Fix


4.1.2.2 – What type of resistance were actually encountered during the course of solution / improvement implementation?

State of Resistance / Support Stakeholder Observed Resistance / Support Approach to Address Resistance

Budget limit vs. consumption rate

Uncertainty on Return on Investment

Technology solution feasibility questioned

– Impact on Global platform

– Return On Investment

Assigned Confirmation Tech POC

Dedicated participation from Tech POC

Discomfort for loss of job in case of process change



Resource knowledge to support new process trainings

Resource bandwidth to support effort required training / workshops

Client

IT

Employee

Training

Finance

Assigned Confirmation MIS POC

Sense of participation from FS Metric POC FS Metric

Threat Disapproval Panic Support

Segment Resistance

Plan for Resistance



Plan to resolve


Solve concern

Eliminate Concerns

37


73

8 Resistances


4.1.2.3 – How was the actual resistance identified?

Stakeholder Observed Resistance

Budget limit vs. consumption rate


Technology solution feasibility questioned

– Impact on Global platform

– Return On Investment

Discomfort for loss of job in case of process change



Resource knowledge to support new process trainings

Resource bandwidth to support effort required training / workshops

Client

Employee

Training

Finance

State of Resistance

Threat Disapproval Panic

Criticality Index

Major Minor

Actual Resistance –

Major Threat to Project

Minor Resistance –

Quick Fix (mostly internal)

4 4

Note: Based on Criticality Index (Threat to project) we selected Actual threat

4 to be addressed


74


4.1.3.1 – How was the actual resistance addressed?

Approach to Address Resistance


Minor – Quick Fix


Plan to resolve


Solve concern

Eliminate Concerns

Segment Resistance

Plan for Resistance


Client

Impact on Global Platform




very high

Employee

Discomfort


process change

Finance

Budget Constraints




For RPA finance refrained from

project due to:

High cost of implementation

Low return on Investment

RPA solution was to be built and deployed at eClerx end Superimposition of RPA

changes at Client platform High cost of implementation

at client end High risk of making changes

at client end

Addressing Concerns



platform











automated solution ‘Clone tracker‘

to Finance


related concerns

CLO

NE

TR

AC

KE

R

CLO

NE

TR

AC

KE

R

38


75


4.1.3.2 – How the team know it was successful in addressing the resistance?

Client

Impact on global platform




very high

Employee

Discomfort


process change

Finance

Budget Constraints




Addressing Concerns



platform











automated solution ‘Clone tracker’

to Finance


related concerns

Change Evidence

Client partnered in finalizing the Clone tracker

Expresses great interest in knowing the progress & benefits

Improved engagement from employees in bringing change

for good

Participation and pride observed on floor welcoming the

change

Budgetary extension from Finance to work on new solution

i.e. Clone Tracker


76


4.1.4.1 – What was the Evidence of stakeholder group buy-in?

Stakeholder Impact Importance Influence A N S SA Concerns Actions

Client High High Blocker




very high

A new solution ‘Clone Tracker’ design

with no impact on client platform

Less or no cost of implementation for

Clone tracker

Business

Head /

Operations

High High Advocate

Sr. Management concern over

dissatisfaction of confirmation EQD

drafting employees

Confirmation Employees discomfort for

loss of job in case of process change

Managers & skip level discussion to

create trust and assurance



Transparent guidelines on performance

linked benefits

Quality Head High High Advocate NA NA

IT Medium Medium Follower NA NA

Finance Medium High Indifferent High consumption rate vs. Budget limit


Shared new solution i.e. Clone tracker

resulted in revised and reduced

implementation cost and effort required

Revised estimated CBA based on Clone

tracker to address ROI related concerns

Training Low Low Follower NA NA

FS Metric NA Low Follower NA NA

A – Against the Project N – Neutral for the Project S – Support the Project SA – Strongly Agree for the Project

Stakeholder Influence Matrix

39


77


4.1.4.2 – What Evidence showed that buy in was obtained prior to implementation?

Prior Holistic

Implementation

Final Approval by

Quality Head

Buy-in was obtained

from all stakeholders

Approved

Stakeholder Influence Matrix

Governance (Quality Head)

Frequency – Monthly & @ each Phase

Monthly update on

Stakeholder Concerns

Resolution for the same

Stakeholder Influence

mapping

Stakeholder concerns at

every phase

Resolution for the same

Stakeholder Influence

mapping


78

4.2.0 | Solution / Improvement Implementation

4.2.1.1 – What process(es) or system(s) were changed or created to implement solution / improvement?

New Process Flow

Automated

Solution

Old Process Flow

Updating trade database

Automated comparison & suggestion

clones trades

Flagging of trade with superseded dates

System Change

CLONE

TRACKER

Daily update

of Clone

tracker

GEMBA

Changes in

process

overview and

training plans

Training

Changes in

SOP with

revised AHT

AHT Revision

Reduced

activities

Change

Points

40


79

4.2.0 | Solution / Improvement Implementation

Pro

cess A

HT

Volume Tracker

Quality Tracker Timeliness Tracker

Base data Calculation

CUIKA Audits

FMEA

Error tracking Error tracker was maintained which was

updated on daily basis

FMEA was performed for new processes to

identify changes in RPN

CUIKA audits were conducted monthly

Non-compliant aspects in methodology were

communicated with Management

Internal Tracker External Tracker

4.2.1.2 – What system were changed or created to measure and manage the performance of the implementation?

Monitor

Productivity

Quality

RU

Speed

RPN changes reported by QC team

Reduced via Kaizen initiatives

Error logs were reported at discussion

forums like

– Monthly Ops review

– Monthly SME’s review


80

4.3.0 | Project Results

4.3.1.1 – What were the results? 4.3.1.2 – How did the results compare to the specific project goals / measures form item 2.1.1?

CLONE

TRACKER

Statistical

Analysis

Pre

Project

Post

Project

Short Term

Sigma

2.83 4.08

Long Term

Sigma

1.33 2.59

DPMO 91,538 4,882

Error

Reduction

Accuracy

~32

~92% ~99%

~2.43

Pre

Project

Post

Project

Weekly

Monthly

Project

41


81

4.3.0 | Project Results

4.3.2.1 – What additional benefits were realized from the project? 4.3.2.2 – How did the team measure any of the additional benefits that were ‘soft’? 4.3.2.3 – How did the additional benefits compare to the expected additional benefit in item 3.2.4?

Monetary

Savings

Effort Optimization

~34 min Time Saved per

Draft

Stakeholder Satisfaction

Client

Satisfaction

Internal

Stakeholders

~35 min ~1 min

Pre Post

FTE Savings 6.71

$201,300

Soft

Benefits

Bonus

Benefit

High turnaround

time

Missing client

SLAs

High Rework

High backlog

High managerial

control requirement

Reduced follow ups

Balanced work

environment

Improved RU

Client gave additional work

to support a new region

CLONE

TRACKER

Avg. Drafting –

Time


Sustenance and Communication 5

42


83

5.1.0 | Sustaining Results Over Time

5.1.1.1 – What was done to make sure the process or system changes made during the implementation continued to be followed?

Standard Operating Procedure Monitoring & Contingency Plan

Acknowledge changes in procedure

Eliminate ambiguities

Communicate working procedure

Measure changes in activity time

Contingency plan to handle

unexpected or rare scenarios

Quick action plan to close dispute

ASAP

Monitoring checklist to resolve

daily ambiguities

Continuous improvement plan to

support changes

Discussing solutions for invisible

problems

Updates on process improvement

initiatives

Training & Coaching

Development

of SOP

Time & Motion

Study

Revision of AHT

Develop procedures to

handle exceptional cases

Monitoring & response

plan to solve system

issues

Monthly reporting of

exceptional cases to SMEs

to develop solutions

Training of Operators

Incorporate new changes Identify new pain areas


84


5.1.1.2 – What evidence showed that this became part of the organization's culture / operating strategy?

Daily Huddle

Time: 10mins

Agenda: Process

issues

Participants:

Manager & leads

Gemba Walk

Team interactions on floor

Correction of clone errors

Monitoring &

Response Plan

Identification of root causes

Development of solution as

part of Kaizen drive

Quality Control:

Continuous monitoring of

process stability to identify

chance & special causes

Refreshing the database

is a start of day activity

for managers

Training Workshops Drives

Tra

inin

g

Process Training

Change Update

Kaizen

43


85


5.1.2.1 – What was done to make sure the benefits obtained from the implementation will be maintained?

Monthly Ops review to discuss Obstacles &

issues related to new changes

Monthly Ops Review

Quarterly client review to assess current

performance of the system changes

Quarterly Client Reports

Quality Index | Control charts |

Productivity Index

Quality Dashboard

SME’s Update include key highlights &

initiatives for the month

Confirmation SME Review

CUIKA audits & FMEA were conducted monthly


86


5.1.2.1 – What evidence showed that this became part of the organization's culture / operating strategy?

Weekly error rate

reduced to 2.75

Spike during first 3

weeks of control phase

Stabilized results

thereafter

Weekly Error rate reduced to 2.43 by continuous

improvement initiative in post project phases

Higher Variation

during Initial runs

Sustaining results after

Improvement phase

Lower contribution of error during control &

post project phase

44


87

5.2.0 | Communication of Results

5.2.1 – How did the team communicate the results to the various stakeholder groups?

Monthly Business Review

Client Presentation

Cli

en

t C

om

mu

nic

ati

on

Discussion Forums

Performance Calls

Weekly Update Calls

Operations Team

Appreciation Mails

Issuing Certificates

Quality Team

Published Reports

Best Practice Sharing

Project Replication Opportunities

Case Repositories

Te

am

Co

mm

un

icati

on

Organization Announcements

Others News Letters

Visual Displays

Won 1st Prize

in FS vertical

Internal Stakeholders External Stakeholders


Thank You

improving trade drafting accuracy & tat - asq · 2017-03-14 · 1 ©2016.eclerx services ltd....

Documents