A Practical Approach A T OOLKIT FOR C ONTINUOUS I MPROVEMENT : Angel M. Fonseca, Faculty Sarah G. Petsis, Administrator Ellen S. Young, Staff
T HE J OURNEY Joined AQIP in 2003 Launched three Action Projects Launched writing team for Systems Portfolio Appraisal Feedback enlightened us
AP4 AND T RAINING CQIN (Continuous Quality Improvement Network) 2008 project Launched Action Project 4: Sustaining a Quality Culture Initiated quality tools training
L ESSONS L EARNED Discovered we already used some tools, but inconsistently Documented all tools we found useful, and how we might use them
C ONSENSUS B UILDING Consensus Building Difficult to attain with different perspectives NOT a unanimous or majority vote Can be supported by everyone, no one opposes
S CENARIO Arrange in work groups Scenario – Who gets the money? Department has $1,000 of a $20,000 budget remaining Four different faculty request the full $1,000 Read the Scenario
B RAINSTORMING To build consensus, brainstorm criteria for decision making… Select a recorder Allow all contributions Don’t censor and don’t criticize No discussion required…. You have 60 seconds…………..GO!
B RAINSTORMING C OMPLETED Previous funds given # Students enrolled # Sections taught Original budget allocation Rank Useful life of purchase Additional cost of use Seniority Can purchased items be shared Popularity among students Popularity among faculty Frequency of using purchase Sabbatical leave request If replacement, age of replaced items Similar products recently purchased
M ULTI -V OTING How do we narrow our brainstorming list to something manageable? How do we get everyone’s ideas included? How do we establish consensus?
M ULTI -V OTING Vote on 1/3 of total items Place a tally next to the five (5) items you think are the most important criteria You have 5 minutes… VOTE!
M ULTI -V OTING R EVIEW Continue rounds of voting as many times as necessary Identifies most important criteria Reduces the list
W EIGHTED V OTING More votes = more weight Professor Previous Funds Given Yes = 1, No = 5 (Value = 10) Additional Cost of Use Yes = 1, No = 5 (Value = 7) Purchased Items can be shared Yes = 5, No = 1 (Value = 4) Total Score Professor Doyle1 x 10 = 105 x 7 = 351 x 4 = 449 Professor Douglas5 x 10 = 501 x 7 = 75 x 4 = 2077 Professor Daniels1x 10 = 101 x 7 = 71 x 4 = 421 Professor Dorsey1 x 10 = 105 x 7 = 355 x 4 =2065
PDCA AS A QI T OOL Four step problem- solving process Shewhart cycle, made popular by Deming Other tools were organized by the PDCA cycle…
JCC’ S Q UALITY T OOLKIT – A W AY OF D OING B USINESS PDCA Meeting Mechanics Planning, Consensus Building, Decision Making Problem Solving Facilitation Guide Agenda Minutes Plus / Delta Evaluation Ground Rules Issue Bin Brainstorming Multi-Voting Weighted Voting Affinity Diagram Consensus Force Field Analysis Benchmarking Fishbone Diagram Flow Charts Expert Advice Check Sheet Pareto Chart Gantt Chart Interview/Survey Charter Evaluation Executive Summary
Thank you for attending! Q UESTIONS ? Angel M. Fonseca Sarah G. Petsis Ellen S. Young