Lean Six Sigma Case Studies Government

Lean Six Sigma Case Studies Government-52
Hence, improvement efforts ultimately center on improving the bottom line of the organization.A Cause-and-effect Relationship for Profit and Not-for-profit Organizations – Source: The Balanced Scorecard (Harvard Business School Press, 1996); Balanced Scorecard Step by Step for Government and Nonprofit Agencies (Wiley, 2003)(Wiley, 2003), proposed a different cause-and-effect relationship for government and nonprofits. Rather, the entity exists “to serve” and Customer is elevated to top billing.The right hand side of the figure above illustrates this concept.

Hence, improvement efforts ultimately center on improving the bottom line of the organization.A Cause-and-effect Relationship for Profit and Not-for-profit Organizations – Source: The Balanced Scorecard (Harvard Business School Press, 1996); Balanced Scorecard Step by Step for Government and Nonprofit Agencies (Wiley, 2003)(Wiley, 2003), proposed a different cause-and-effect relationship for government and nonprofits. Rather, the entity exists “to serve” and Customer is elevated to top billing.The right hand side of the figure above illustrates this concept.

Tags: Star Wars EssayWomen Entrepreneurship Research PapersAn Essay About DemocracyPersonal Essay Grade 4Review An EssayThe Crucible Theme EssayWords To Use When Writing A Argumentative EssayEssays On Jihad Vs. Mcworld

Second, the process for receiving, approving and issuing permits was examined and made leaner.

In this case, a DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) analysis revealed that the turnaround time could be reduced significantly by implementing the preferred solution – online permits.

Looking at this red tape reduction in terms of the Balanced Scorecard shows an opportunity to refocus the scorecard for government environments.

When Robert Kaplan and David Norton first proposed the scorecard with its four perspectives –, Financial, Customer, Internal Business Processes, and Learning and Growth – they were primarily looking through the lens of a profit-making entity.

In fact, there is frequently tension between these two aims.

On one hand, government agencies want to provide comprehensive services.On the other, they want to be seen as lean and efficient, using tax payers’ money wisely.Likewise, the public and other stakeholders want – and indeed demand – effective services from government agencies; however, tax increases are always unpopular, even when they are used to expand service levels.The left side of the figure below illustrates a possible cause-and-effect relationship between the perspectives in a for-profit organization.Note that Financial reigns supreme – although Kaplan and Norton demonstrated the importance of all perspectives, Financial still represents the final “end” – because a company’s overriding responsibility is to its shareholders.Six Sigma, with its emphasis in many cases on hard, current-year results, is often not associated with government agencies and their processes.One reason is that a government’s mission is as much about providing services to the public and other stakeholders as it is about cutting costs and realizing efficiencies.In this way, affected private sector entities can operate with both a minimum number of regulations and with efficiently administered regulations, lowering their compliance costs.The efforts of a government to reduce and improve regulations are often referred to as .Because the reduction in turnaround time equates directly to customer waiting time, this saving translated directly to the transport companies’ bottom line. Internally, the saving manifested itself as a leaner, shorter process; staff members were able to spend more time on value-added work.Externally, the savings resulted in reduced waiting time for permits, enabling improved achievement of delivery deadlines.

SHOW COMMENTS

Comments Lean Six Sigma Case Studies Government

The Latest from arenda-proektorov.ru ©