Process Improvement (Lean & Six Sigma)
Required Inputs
| Input |
Description |
Required? |
| Process name and scope |
The specific process or value chain to analyze |
Yes |
| Current performance data |
Cycle times, throughput, defect rates, costs, headcount |
Yes |
| Business context |
Industry, company size, competitive pressures |
Yes |
| Pain points / triggers |
Why improvement is needed now |
Yes |
| Existing improvement history |
Past initiatives, what worked, what failed |
Recommended |
| Constraints |
Budget, timeline, technology, regulatory, union/labor |
Recommended |
| Stakeholder map |
Process owner, sponsors, frontline operators |
Recommended |
Execution Steps
Step 1: Process Maturity Assessment
Score the current process across 6 dimensions on a 1-5 scale:
| Dimension |
1 - Ad Hoc |
2 - Defined |
3 - Measured |
4 - Managed |
5 - Optimized |
| Standardization |
No SOPs; tribal knowledge |
SOPs exist but inconsistent |
SOPs followed; exceptions tracked |
SOPs regularly reviewed and updated |
Continuous SOP optimization with feedback loops |
| Measurement |
No metrics tracked |
Basic output metrics only |
Input + output metrics; dashboards exist |
SPC applied; variation understood |
Predictive analytics drive decisions |
| Capability |
Untrained operators |
Basic training programs |
Certified operators; skill matrices |
Cross-training; problem-solving culture |
Autonomous teams driving improvement |
| Technology |
Manual / paper-based |
Basic IT support |
Integrated systems; some automation |
Advanced automation; real-time data |
AI/ML-driven process optimization |
| Management |
Reactive firefighting |
Shift-level oversight |
Daily management with escalation |
Tiered daily management system |
Self-correcting with exception-based management |
| Continuous Improvement |
No CI activity |
Suggestion boxes only |
Structured kaizen events |
CI embedded in daily work |
Innovation pipeline with portfolio management |
Maturity Score = Average across 6 dimensions. Interpret as:
- 1.0-2.0: Foundational — focus on standardization and basic measurement first
- 2.1-3.0: Developing — ready for structured Lean deployment
- 3.1-4.0: Competent — ready for Six Sigma and advanced analytics
- 4.1-5.0: Leading — focus on sustaining and innovating
Step 2: Value Stream Mapping (Current State)
Document the end-to-end process with these data points at each step:
For each process step, capture:
- Process time (PT) — time actually working on the item
- Lead time (LT) — total elapsed time including waiting
- Changeover time (C/O) — time to switch between variants
- Uptime / availability — percentage of scheduled time the step is operational
- First-pass yield (FPY) — percentage of units passing without rework
- Headcount — people required
- Batch size — units processed before moving downstream
- Inventory / WIP — units waiting between this step and the next
Calculate summary metrics:
- Total Process Time = Sum of all PT
- Total Lead Time = Sum of all LT (including queue times)
- Process Cycle Efficiency (PCE) = Total Process Time / Total Lead Time (target: >25% for service, >10% for manufacturing is typical starting point)
- Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY) = Product of all FPY values
- Takt Time = Available time / Customer demand rate
Step 3: Waste Identification (DOWNTIME Framework)
Systematically identify the 8 wastes of Lean at each process step:
| Waste |
Definition |
What to Look For |
Quantification Method |
| D - Defects |
Errors requiring rework or scrap |
Rework loops, scrap bins, error reports, customer complaints |
Cost of rework labor + materials + warranty claims |
| O - Overproduction |
Making more/sooner than needed |
Excess inventory, forecasting buffers, "just in case" runs |
Carrying cost of excess inventory + obsolescence risk |
| W - Waiting |
Idle time between steps |
Queue times, approval delays, system downtime, batch accumulation |
Idle labor cost + opportunity cost of delayed throughput |
| N - Non-utilized talent |
Underusing people's skills |
Manual tasks that could be automated, no CI involvement, siloed roles |
Productivity gap + turnover cost from disengagement |
| T - Transportation |
Unnecessary movement of materials |
Cross-building transfers, multiple handoffs, shipping to/from warehouse |
Transport cost + damage/loss risk + time delay |
| I - Inventory |
Excess raw, WIP, or finished goods |
Warehouse space, aging stock, cash tied up, obsolescence write-offs |
Carrying cost (typically 20-30% of inventory value annually) |
| M - Motion |
Unnecessary movement of people |
Walking, searching, reaching, excessive clicks in software |
Time lost x labor rate |
| E - Extra processing |
Doing more than customer requires |
Over-engineering, redundant approvals, duplicate data entry |
Labor cost of non-value-added steps |
For each identified waste instance:
- Estimate annual cost in dollars
- Estimate time consumed per unit/transaction
- Rate ease of elimination: Easy / Medium / Hard
- Rate impact if eliminated: Low / Medium / High
Step 4: DMAIC Analysis (for Six Sigma-Level Issues)
Apply DMAIC to the top 3-5 problems identified:
Define:
- Problem statement (specific, measurable, bounded)
- Project scope (in-scope / out-of-scope)
- Goal statement with target metric and timeline
- Business case (cost of the problem annually)
Measure:
- Identify CTQ (Critical to Quality) characteristics
- Establish measurement system (gauge R&R if applicable)
- Collect baseline data (minimum 30 data points)
- Calculate process capability (Cp, Cpk) or process sigma level
Analyze:
- Identify potential root causes (fishbone diagram / 5 Why)
- Validate root causes with data (hypothesis testing, regression, Pareto)
- Quantify contribution of each root cause
Improve:
- Generate solution alternatives (minimum 3 per root cause)
- Evaluate solutions using Pugh matrix or decision matrix
- Pilot solution with controlled implementation
- Validate improvement with before/after comparison
Control:
- Document new standard operating procedures
- Implement control charts or monitoring dashboards
- Create response plans for out-of-control conditions
- Transfer ownership to process owner
Step 5: Quick-Win Identification (< 90 Days)
Filter all improvement opportunities through the quick-win matrix:
| Criteria |
Quick Win |
Not a Quick Win |
| Implementation time |
< 90 days |
> 90 days |
| Investment required |
< $50K or within discretionary budget |
Requires capital approval |
| Complexity |
Single process / team |
Cross-functional or system change |
| Risk |
Low; easily reversible |
High; difficult to reverse |
| Dependency |
No dependency on other initiatives |
Requires other projects first |
Prioritize quick wins by: Impact ($) / Effort (person-days)
Step 6: ROI Calculation for Each Initiative
For every improvement initiative, calculate:
One-Time Costs:
+ Implementation labor (internal hours x loaded rate)
+ External consulting / contractor costs
+ Technology / equipment costs
+ Training costs
+ Change management costs
= Total Investment
Annual Benefits:
+ Labor savings (hours freed x loaded rate)
+ Material / scrap savings
+ Throughput improvement (additional revenue capacity)
+ Quality improvement (reduced rework, warranty, returns)
+ Inventory reduction (one-time cash release + ongoing carrying cost savings)
= Total Annual Benefit
ROI = (Annual Benefit - Annualized Cost) / Total Investment x 100%
Payback Period = Total Investment / Annual Benefit (months)
3-Year NPV = Sum of discounted annual benefits - Total Investment
Step 7: Build Improvement Roadmap
Sequence initiatives into three horizons:
- Wave 1 (0-90 days): Quick wins — no/low investment, immediate impact
- Wave 2 (3-12 months): Core improvements — moderate investment, structural changes
- Wave 3 (12-24 months): Transformational — significant investment, system/culture change
For each initiative in the roadmap, specify:
- Owner, timeline, resources needed
- Dependency on other initiatives
- Expected benefit ($ and time)
- Key milestones and decision gates
- Risk and mitigation
Output Template
# Process Improvement Assessment: [Process Name]
**Client:** [Name]
**Date:** [Date]
**Prepared by:** [Consultant]
**Process Scope:** [Start point] to [End point]
---
## 1. Executive Summary
[2-3 paragraphs: current state, key findings, total improvement opportunity in $ and %]
**Total Identified Waste:** $[X]M annually
**Achievable Savings (12-month):** $[X]M (XX% of waste)
**Required Investment:** $[X]M
**Expected ROI:** [X]%
**Payback Period:** [X] months
---
## 2. Process Maturity Assessment
| Dimension | Current Score (1-5) | Target Score | Gap |
|-----------|-------------------|--------------|-----|
| Standardization | | | |
| Measurement | | | |
| Capability | | | |
| Technology | | | |
| Management | | | |
| Continuous Improvement | | | |
| **Overall Maturity** | **[Avg]** | **[Target]** | **[Gap]** |
**Maturity Interpretation:** [Foundational / Developing / Competent / Leading]
---
## 3. Value Stream Map Summary
### Current State Metrics
| Process Step | Process Time | Lead Time | FPY | Headcount | WIP |
|-------------|-------------|-----------|-----|-----------|-----|
| [Step 1] | | | | | |
| [Step 2] | | | | | |
| ... | | | | | |
| **Total** | **[Sum PT]** | **[Sum LT]** | **[RTY]** | **[Total]** | **[Total]** |
**Process Cycle Efficiency (PCE):** [X]% (Target: [X]%)
**Takt Time:** [X] [units] per [period]
**Current Throughput vs. Demand:** [X]% utilization
### Future State Targets
| Metric | Current | Target | Improvement |
|--------|---------|--------|-------------|
| Total Lead Time | | | -XX% |
| Process Cycle Efficiency | | | +XX pp |
| Rolled Throughput Yield | | | +XX pp |
| Total Headcount | | | -XX FTEs |
| WIP Inventory | | | -XX% |
---
## 4. Waste Quantification Table
| # | Waste Type | Location | Description | Annual Cost ($) | Time per Unit | Ease | Impact |
|---|-----------|----------|-------------|----------------|---------------|------|--------|
| 1 | [D/O/W/N/T/I/M/E] | [Step] | [Detail] | $[X] | [X min/hrs] | [E/M/H] | [L/M/H] |
| 2 | | | | | | | |
| ... | | | | | | | |
| | | | **Total** | **$[X]** | | | |
### Waste by Category
| Waste Category | Annual Cost ($) | % of Total |
|---------------|----------------|------------|
| Defects | | |
| Overproduction | | |
| Waiting | | |
| Non-utilized Talent | | |
| Transportation | | |
| Inventory | | |
| Motion | | |
| Extra Processing | | |
| **Total** | **$[X]** | **100%** |
---
## 5. DMAIC Project Summaries
### Project 1: [Name]
| Phase | Key Finding / Action |
|-------|---------------------|
| **Define** | Problem: [X]. Goal: [metric] from [current] to [target] by [date] |
| **Measure** | Baseline: [X]. Process sigma: [X]. Measurement system validated: [Y/N] |
| **Analyze** | Root causes: [1, 2, 3]. Top contributor: [X] (XX% of variation) |
| **Improve** | Recommended solution: [X]. Pilot results: [X] |
| **Control** | Control method: [X]. Owner: [X] |
**Estimated Annual Benefit:** $[X]
**Implementation Cost:** $[X]
[Repeat for each DMAIC project]
---
## 6. Improvement Roadmap
### Wave 1: Quick Wins (0-90 Days)
| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | Payback | Status |
|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|---------|--------|
| 1 | | | | | | |
| 2 | | | | | | |
**Wave 1 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment
### Wave 2: Core Improvements (3-12 Months)
| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | ROI | Dependencies |
|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|-----|--------------|
| 1 | | | | | | |
| 2 | | | | | | |
**Wave 2 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment
### Wave 3: Transformational (12-24 Months)
| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | ROI | Dependencies |
|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|-----|--------------|
| 1 | | | | | | |
| 2 | | | | | | |
**Wave 3 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment
---
## 7. Investment Summary
| Horizon | Annual Benefit | Investment | ROI | Payback |
|---------|---------------|------------|-----|---------|
| Wave 1 (Quick Wins) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |
| Wave 2 (Core) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |
| Wave 3 (Transformational) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |
| **Total** | **$[X]** | **$[X]** | **[X]%** | **[X] mo** |
**3-Year NPV (@ [X]% discount rate):** $[X]
---
## 8. Risks and Dependencies
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|------------|--------|------------|
| | H/M/L | H/M/L | |
---
## 9. Recommended Next Steps
1. [Immediate action with owner and deadline]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]
Quality Checks
1---2name: process-improvement-lean-six-sigma3description: USE THIS SKILL when the user asks about process improvement, Lean, Six Sigma, DMAIC, value stream mapping, waste reduction, process optimization, cycle time reduction, process KPIs, process maturity, or operational efficiency. Also trigger when someone mentions "8 wastes," "DOWNTIME," "kaizen," "continuous improvement," "bottleneck analysis," "quick wins," or requests an improvement roadmap for any operational process.4---56# Process Improvement (Lean & Six Sigma)78## Required Inputs910| Input | Description | Required? |11|-------|-------------|-----------|12| Process name and scope | The specific process or value chain to analyze | Yes |13| Current performance data | Cycle times, throughput, defect rates, costs, headcount | Yes |14| Business context | Industry, company size, competitive pressures | Yes |15| Pain points / triggers | Why improvement is needed now | Yes |16| Existing improvement history | Past initiatives, what worked, what failed | Recommended |17| Constraints | Budget, timeline, technology, regulatory, union/labor | Recommended |18| Stakeholder map | Process owner, sponsors, frontline operators | Recommended |1920## Execution Steps2122### Step 1: Process Maturity Assessment2324Score the current process across 6 dimensions on a 1-5 scale:2526| Dimension | 1 - Ad Hoc | 2 - Defined | 3 - Measured | 4 - Managed | 5 - Optimized |27|-----------|-----------|-------------|--------------|-------------|---------------|28| **Standardization** | No SOPs; tribal knowledge | SOPs exist but inconsistent | SOPs followed; exceptions tracked | SOPs regularly reviewed and updated | Continuous SOP optimization with feedback loops |29| **Measurement** | No metrics tracked | Basic output metrics only | Input + output metrics; dashboards exist | SPC applied; variation understood | Predictive analytics drive decisions |30| **Capability** | Untrained operators | Basic training programs | Certified operators; skill matrices | Cross-training; problem-solving culture | Autonomous teams driving improvement |31| **Technology** | Manual / paper-based | Basic IT support | Integrated systems; some automation | Advanced automation; real-time data | AI/ML-driven process optimization |32| **Management** | Reactive firefighting | Shift-level oversight | Daily management with escalation | Tiered daily management system | Self-correcting with exception-based management |33| **Continuous Improvement** | No CI activity | Suggestion boxes only | Structured kaizen events | CI embedded in daily work | Innovation pipeline with portfolio management |3435**Maturity Score** = Average across 6 dimensions. Interpret as:36- 1.0-2.0: Foundational — focus on standardization and basic measurement first37- 2.1-3.0: Developing — ready for structured Lean deployment38- 3.1-4.0: Competent — ready for Six Sigma and advanced analytics39- 4.1-5.0: Leading — focus on sustaining and innovating4041### Step 2: Value Stream Mapping (Current State)4243Document the end-to-end process with these data points at each step:4445For **each process step**, capture:461. **Process time (PT)** — time actually working on the item472. **Lead time (LT)** — total elapsed time including waiting483. **Changeover time (C/O)** — time to switch between variants494. **Uptime / availability** — percentage of scheduled time the step is operational505. **First-pass yield (FPY)** — percentage of units passing without rework516. **Headcount** — people required527. **Batch size** — units processed before moving downstream538. **Inventory / WIP** — units waiting between this step and the next5455Calculate summary metrics:56- **Total Process Time** = Sum of all PT57- **Total Lead Time** = Sum of all LT (including queue times)58- **Process Cycle Efficiency (PCE)** = Total Process Time / Total Lead Time (target: >25% for service, >10% for manufacturing is typical starting point)59- **Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY)** = Product of all FPY values60- **Takt Time** = Available time / Customer demand rate6162### Step 3: Waste Identification (DOWNTIME Framework)6364Systematically identify the 8 wastes of Lean at each process step:6566| Waste | Definition | What to Look For | Quantification Method |67|-------|-----------|-------------------|----------------------|68| **D** - Defects | Errors requiring rework or scrap | Rework loops, scrap bins, error reports, customer complaints | Cost of rework labor + materials + warranty claims |69| **O** - Overproduction | Making more/sooner than needed | Excess inventory, forecasting buffers, "just in case" runs | Carrying cost of excess inventory + obsolescence risk |70| **W** - Waiting | Idle time between steps | Queue times, approval delays, system downtime, batch accumulation | Idle labor cost + opportunity cost of delayed throughput |71| **N** - Non-utilized talent | Underusing people's skills | Manual tasks that could be automated, no CI involvement, siloed roles | Productivity gap + turnover cost from disengagement |72| **T** - Transportation | Unnecessary movement of materials | Cross-building transfers, multiple handoffs, shipping to/from warehouse | Transport cost + damage/loss risk + time delay |73| **I** - Inventory | Excess raw, WIP, or finished goods | Warehouse space, aging stock, cash tied up, obsolescence write-offs | Carrying cost (typically 20-30% of inventory value annually) |74| **M** - Motion | Unnecessary movement of people | Walking, searching, reaching, excessive clicks in software | Time lost x labor rate |75| **E** - Extra processing | Doing more than customer requires | Over-engineering, redundant approvals, duplicate data entry | Labor cost of non-value-added steps |7677For each identified waste instance:78- Estimate **annual cost** in dollars79- Estimate **time consumed** per unit/transaction80- Rate **ease of elimination**: Easy / Medium / Hard81- Rate **impact if eliminated**: Low / Medium / High8283### Step 4: DMAIC Analysis (for Six Sigma-Level Issues)8485Apply DMAIC to the top 3-5 problems identified:8687**Define:**88- Problem statement (specific, measurable, bounded)89- Project scope (in-scope / out-of-scope)90- Goal statement with target metric and timeline91- Business case (cost of the problem annually)9293**Measure:**94- Identify CTQ (Critical to Quality) characteristics95- Establish measurement system (gauge R&R if applicable)96- Collect baseline data (minimum 30 data points)97- Calculate process capability (Cp, Cpk) or process sigma level9899**Analyze:**100- Identify potential root causes (fishbone diagram / 5 Why)101- Validate root causes with data (hypothesis testing, regression, Pareto)102- Quantify contribution of each root cause103104**Improve:**105- Generate solution alternatives (minimum 3 per root cause)106- Evaluate solutions using Pugh matrix or decision matrix107- Pilot solution with controlled implementation108- Validate improvement with before/after comparison109110**Control:**111- Document new standard operating procedures112- Implement control charts or monitoring dashboards113- Create response plans for out-of-control conditions114- Transfer ownership to process owner115116### Step 5: Quick-Win Identification (< 90 Days)117118Filter all improvement opportunities through the quick-win matrix:119120| Criteria | Quick Win | Not a Quick Win |121|----------|-----------|-----------------|122| Implementation time | < 90 days | > 90 days |123| Investment required | < $50K or within discretionary budget | Requires capital approval |124| Complexity | Single process / team | Cross-functional or system change |125| Risk | Low; easily reversible | High; difficult to reverse |126| Dependency | No dependency on other initiatives | Requires other projects first |127128Prioritize quick wins by: **Impact ($) / Effort (person-days)**129130### Step 6: ROI Calculation for Each Initiative131132For every improvement initiative, calculate:133134```135One-Time Costs:136 + Implementation labor (internal hours x loaded rate)137 + External consulting / contractor costs138 + Technology / equipment costs139 + Training costs140 + Change management costs141 = Total Investment142143Annual Benefits:144 + Labor savings (hours freed x loaded rate)145 + Material / scrap savings146 + Throughput improvement (additional revenue capacity)147 + Quality improvement (reduced rework, warranty, returns)148 + Inventory reduction (one-time cash release + ongoing carrying cost savings)149 = Total Annual Benefit150151ROI = (Annual Benefit - Annualized Cost) / Total Investment x 100%152Payback Period = Total Investment / Annual Benefit (months)1533-Year NPV = Sum of discounted annual benefits - Total Investment154```155156### Step 7: Build Improvement Roadmap157158Sequence initiatives into three horizons:159- **Wave 1 (0-90 days):** Quick wins — no/low investment, immediate impact160- **Wave 2 (3-12 months):** Core improvements — moderate investment, structural changes161- **Wave 3 (12-24 months):** Transformational — significant investment, system/culture change162163For each initiative in the roadmap, specify:164- Owner, timeline, resources needed165- Dependency on other initiatives166- Expected benefit ($ and time)167- Key milestones and decision gates168- Risk and mitigation169170## Output Template171172```markdown173# Process Improvement Assessment: [Process Name]174175**Client:** [Name]176**Date:** [Date]177**Prepared by:** [Consultant]178**Process Scope:** [Start point] to [End point]179180---181182## 1. Executive Summary183184[2-3 paragraphs: current state, key findings, total improvement opportunity in $ and %]185186**Total Identified Waste:** $[X]M annually187**Achievable Savings (12-month):** $[X]M (XX% of waste)188**Required Investment:** $[X]M189**Expected ROI:** [X]%190**Payback Period:** [X] months191192---193194## 2. Process Maturity Assessment195196| Dimension | Current Score (1-5) | Target Score | Gap |197|-----------|-------------------|--------------|-----|198| Standardization | | | |199| Measurement | | | |200| Capability | | | |201| Technology | | | |202| Management | | | |203| Continuous Improvement | | | |204| **Overall Maturity** | **[Avg]** | **[Target]** | **[Gap]** |205206**Maturity Interpretation:** [Foundational / Developing / Competent / Leading]207208---209210## 3. Value Stream Map Summary211212### Current State Metrics213214| Process Step | Process Time | Lead Time | FPY | Headcount | WIP |215|-------------|-------------|-----------|-----|-----------|-----|216| [Step 1] | | | | | |217| [Step 2] | | | | | |218| ... | | | | | |219| **Total** | **[Sum PT]** | **[Sum LT]** | **[RTY]** | **[Total]** | **[Total]** |220221**Process Cycle Efficiency (PCE):** [X]% (Target: [X]%)222**Takt Time:** [X] [units] per [period]223**Current Throughput vs. Demand:** [X]% utilization224225### Future State Targets226227| Metric | Current | Target | Improvement |228|--------|---------|--------|-------------|229| Total Lead Time | | | -XX% |230| Process Cycle Efficiency | | | +XX pp |231| Rolled Throughput Yield | | | +XX pp |232| Total Headcount | | | -XX FTEs |233| WIP Inventory | | | -XX% |234235---236237## 4. Waste Quantification Table238239| # | Waste Type | Location | Description | Annual Cost ($) | Time per Unit | Ease | Impact |240|---|-----------|----------|-------------|----------------|---------------|------|--------|241| 1 | [D/O/W/N/T/I/M/E] | [Step] | [Detail] | $[X] | [X min/hrs] | [E/M/H] | [L/M/H] |242| 2 | | | | | | | |243| ... | | | | | | | |244| | | | **Total** | **$[X]** | | | |245246### Waste by Category247248| Waste Category | Annual Cost ($) | % of Total |249|---------------|----------------|------------|250| Defects | | |251| Overproduction | | |252| Waiting | | |253| Non-utilized Talent | | |254| Transportation | | |255| Inventory | | |256| Motion | | |257| Extra Processing | | |258| **Total** | **$[X]** | **100%** |259260---261262## 5. DMAIC Project Summaries263264### Project 1: [Name]265266| Phase | Key Finding / Action |267|-------|---------------------|268| **Define** | Problem: [X]. Goal: [metric] from [current] to [target] by [date] |269| **Measure** | Baseline: [X]. Process sigma: [X]. Measurement system validated: [Y/N] |270| **Analyze** | Root causes: [1, 2, 3]. Top contributor: [X] (XX% of variation) |271| **Improve** | Recommended solution: [X]. Pilot results: [X] |272| **Control** | Control method: [X]. Owner: [X] |273274**Estimated Annual Benefit:** $[X]275**Implementation Cost:** $[X]276277[Repeat for each DMAIC project]278279---280281## 6. Improvement Roadmap282283### Wave 1: Quick Wins (0-90 Days)284285| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | Payback | Status |286|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|---------|--------|287| 1 | | | | | | |288| 2 | | | | | | |289290**Wave 1 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment291292### Wave 2: Core Improvements (3-12 Months)293294| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | ROI | Dependencies |295|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|-----|--------------|296| 1 | | | | | | |297| 2 | | | | | | |298299**Wave 2 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment300301### Wave 3: Transformational (12-24 Months)302303| # | Initiative | Owner | Benefit ($/yr) | Investment ($) | ROI | Dependencies |304|---|-----------|-------|----------------|---------------|-----|--------------|305| 1 | | | | | | |306| 2 | | | | | | |307308**Wave 3 Total:** $[X] benefit / $[X] investment309310---311312## 7. Investment Summary313314| Horizon | Annual Benefit | Investment | ROI | Payback |315|---------|---------------|------------|-----|---------|316| Wave 1 (Quick Wins) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |317| Wave 2 (Core) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |318| Wave 3 (Transformational) | $[X] | $[X] | [X]% | [X] mo |319| **Total** | **$[X]** | **$[X]** | **[X]%** | **[X] mo** |320321**3-Year NPV (@ [X]% discount rate):** $[X]322323---324325## 8. Risks and Dependencies326327| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |328|------|------------|--------|------------|329| | H/M/L | H/M/L | |330331---332333## 9. Recommended Next Steps3343351. [Immediate action with owner and deadline]3362. [Second action]3373. [Third action]338```339340## Quality Checks341342- [ ] Every waste instance is quantified in both dollars and time — no qualitative-only waste items343- [ ] Process Cycle Efficiency is calculated and compared to industry benchmark344- [ ] Rolled Throughput Yield is calculated across the entire value stream, not just individual steps345- [ ] Quick wins are genuinely achievable in < 90 days with < $50K investment346- [ ] ROI calculation includes all cost categories (labor, materials, technology, training, change management)347- [ ] Each DMAIC project has a specific, measurable goal statement with baseline and target348- [ ] Improvement roadmap has clear sequencing with dependencies identified349- [ ] Maturity assessment scores are justified with observable evidence, not assumed350- [ ] Future state targets are realistic (not "eliminate all waste") and benchmarked351- [ ] Risk table includes mitigation actions, not just risk identification352- [ ] Payback periods are stated in months; NPV uses an appropriate discount rate353- [ ] No initiative lacks an assigned owner