GOAL to assess and reconfigure the processes employed within Action Research to improve responsiveness and efficiency.
CASE OVERVIEW Action Response is a London-based charity dedicated to providing fast responses to critical situations throughout the world The charity receives requests for cash aid usually from an intermediary charity and looks to process the request quickly and provide funds where they are needed, when they are needed
TWO KEY ISSUE 1. There are complaints about the speed of their response. 2. Costs are beginning to spiral.
WHAT OBJECTIVES SHOULD THE ARAPU PROCESS BE TRYING TO ACHIEVE?
the very basic aim of the charity is to provide short-term aid. Therefore, unless the process can turn around applications fast, it is failing to fulfil its primary aim.
WHAT IS THE MAIN PROBLEM WITH THE CURRENT ARAPU PROCESS? we need to know how many claims each stage has to process how many people are available at each stage how long each person is available for processing how long on average each claim takes to process
300/week Received and Stored by 4 Clerks Applications are in line of processing Opening and checking post Opening and checking process Coding Process by 5 clerks Inputting data Secretary’s desks Assessing applications by 7 assessors Proceed applications 100/week Waiting for committee meets on Thursday Committee ratification Ratified AcceptedDeclined payment Store applicatio ns Store For Dispatch Dispatch Process payment Recycle
If we take the average 300 applications per week, and recycle 100 after the assessment stage, how much ‘value-added ’ work is being done at each stage? receipt stage The time needed for each application is 10 minutes and the value-added workload is 400 × 10 minutes of work (4000 minutes), which is hours. coding stage The time needed for each application is 20 minutes and the value-added workload is 400 × 20 minutes of work (8000 minutes), which is hours. assessment stage The time needed for one-third of the applications is 10 minutes, and for the other two-thirds is 60 minutes. The average work time of (1/3 × 10) + (2/3 × 60) is minutes and the valueadded workload is 400 × minutes of work (17,332 minutes), which is hours.
The payment stage gets 150 applications per week (half of the 300 that emerge from the assessors). The time needed for each application is 50 minutes and the value-added workload is150 × 50 minutes of work (7500 minutes), which is 125 hours. The decline stage gets 150 applications per week (half of the 300 that emerge from the assessors). The time needed for each application is 30 minutes and the value-added workload is 150 × 30 minutes of work (4500 minutes), which is 75 hours. The dispatch stage gets 300 applications per week. The time needed for each application is10 minutes and the value-added workload is 300 × 10 minutes of work (3000 minutes), which is 50 hours.
throughput time = work in progress × cycle time The whole process output is 300 claims processed per week and from the sample taken by Susan N’tini, there are around 2000 claims in process at any given time The cycle time of the whole process is (35 / 300) = hours Throughput time = 2000 × = hours = days > 20 days
HOW COULD THE ARAPU PROCESS BE IMPROVED? ARAPU improvement balance the process Hired new assesors,More throughput eliminate applications that need further information Educating potential applicants
SIMULATION 300 applications per week cycle time is 35 / 300 = hours work in progress of 1200, throughput time × 1200 = hours (20 days)
HOW COULD THE ARAPU PROCESS BE IMPROVED? Internet-based services
THE STAGES OF PRODUCT/SERVICE DESIGN
SIMULATION processing 400 applications per week (Assessing stage) took minutes x 400 = minutes ( hours) / 35 = 8.25 Assessors WITHOUT RECYCLING × 300 =12999 minutes ( hours) 216 / 35 = 6.19 assessors