1. Effective Meetings YesNo 1.Was the meeting necessary? 2.Was there an objective communicated in advance? 3.Was time used effectively? 4.Was there adequate advance information to help me understand and contribute to the objective? 5.Did I contribute to the objective? 6.Was the objective accomplished?

2. Pareto Diagram Steps 1.Select the problems that are to be compared and rank ordered by using existing data 2.Select the standard for comparison unit of measurement 3.Select time period to be studied – e.g. hours, days, weeks 4.Gather necessary data on the site of each category

3. Pareto Diagram Steps 5.Compare the frequency or cost of each category relative to all other categories 6.List the categories from left to right on the horizontal axis in their order of decreasing frequency or cost 7.Draw a rectangle where height represents the frequency or cost in the classification (i.e. a histogram or bar chart)

4. Citibank Meeting Pareto Chart 50 40 30 20 10 0 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% DefectsPercentage Item #4 Was there adequate advance information to help me understand and contribute to the objective? Item #2 Was there an objective communi- cated in advance? Item #3 Was the time used effectively? Item #6 Was the objective accomplished? Item #5 Did I contribute to the objective? Sum % of defects Number of defects 70%

5. Implementing Process Improvement Citibank Meeting Defect Reduction Everyone filled out the questionnaire (collecting data on defects) Every “NO” was a defect John Reed ordered corrective action; henceforth –Every meeting had an agenda –Every agenda stated the objective Result of fixing Items #4 and #2: –Meeting attendance reduced 50% –Meeting time reduced 50% –Reported “defects” reduced 90% Used Pareto diagram to achieve rapid, measurable improvement –10X defect reduction in 2 years requires 67% improvement/year –80/20 Rule –Fixing items #2 and #4 achieved immediate 70+% improvement