Читать книгу Materials Processing A Complete Guide - 2020 Edition - Gerardus Blokdyk - Страница 8
ОглавлениеCRITERION #2: DEFINE:
INTENT: Formulate the stakeholder problem. Define the problem, needs and objectives.
In my belief, the answer to this question is clearly defined:
5 Strongly Agree
4 Agree
3 Neutral
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree
1. How do you gather the stories?
<--- Score
2. Who is gathering Materials Processing information?
<--- Score
3. Has/have the customer(s) been identified?
<--- Score
4. Is there any additional Materials Processing definition of success?
<--- Score
5. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?
<--- Score
6. How do you keep key subject matter experts in the loop?
<--- Score
7. What information should you gather?
<--- Score
8. What are the boundaries of the scope? What is in bounds and what is not? What is the start point? What is the stop point?
<--- Score
9. Does the scope remain the same?
<--- Score
10. Have specific policy objectives been defined?
<--- Score
11. What are the Materials Processing tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
12. What gets examined?
<--- Score
13. Has a team charter been developed and communicated?
<--- Score
14. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
15. Has a Materials Processing requirement not been met?
<--- Score
16. What would be the goal or target for a Materials Processing’s improvement team?
<--- Score
17. Is Materials Processing required?
<--- Score
18. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Materials Processing?
<--- Score
19. Are accountability and ownership for Materials Processing clearly defined?
<--- Score
20. Are resources adequate for the scope?
<--- Score
21. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
22. When is the estimated completion date?
<--- Score
23. Are all requirements met?
<--- Score
24. What are the record-keeping requirements of Materials Processing activities?
<--- Score
25. The political context: who holds power?
<--- Score
26. Are the Materials Processing requirements complete?
<--- Score
27. How do you hand over Materials Processing context?
<--- Score
28. Is there a critical path to deliver Materials Processing results?
<--- Score
29. What constraints exist that might impact the team?
<--- Score
30. How did the Materials Processing manager receive input to the development of a Materials Processing improvement plan and the estimated completion dates/times of each activity?
<--- Score
31. Have all of the relationships been defined properly?
<--- Score
32. Are task requirements clearly defined?
<--- Score
33. What is a worst-case scenario for losses?
<--- Score
34. What key stakeholder process output measure(s) does Materials Processing leverage and how?
<--- Score
35. Will a Materials Processing production readiness review be required?
<--- Score
36. How was the ‘as is’ process map developed, reviewed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
37. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
38. Are required metrics defined, what are they?
<--- Score
39. Is scope creep really all bad news?
<--- Score
40. What is out-of-scope initially?
<--- Score
41. How would you define Materials Processing leadership?
<--- Score
42. Do you all define Materials Processing in the same way?
<--- Score
43. What are the requirements for audit information?
<--- Score
44. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?
<--- Score
45. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Materials Processing work? How is the team addressing them?
<--- Score
46. What are the Roles and Responsibilities for each team member and its leadership? Where is this documented?
<--- Score
47. Are audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods defined?
<--- Score
48. How often are the team meetings?
<--- Score
49. What happens if Materials Processing’s scope changes?
<--- Score
50. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
51. What intelligence can you gather?
<--- Score
52. Is Materials Processing currently on schedule according to the plan?
<--- Score
53. Who approved the Materials Processing scope?
<--- Score
54. Do you have organizational privacy requirements?
<--- Score
55. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
56. Has the direction changed at all during the course of Materials Processing? If so, when did it change and why?
<--- Score
57. What is the worst case scenario?
<--- Score
58. How do you gather requirements?
<--- Score
59. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?
<--- Score
60. What critical content must be communicated – who, what, when, where, and how?
<--- Score
61. How do you think the partners involved in Materials Processing would have defined success?
<--- Score
62. How do you manage changes in Materials Processing requirements?
<--- Score
63. Is the work to date meeting requirements?
<--- Score
64. What knowledge or experience is required?
<--- Score
65. How do you manage unclear Materials Processing requirements?
<--- Score
66. What scope to assess?
<--- Score
67. Who defines (or who defined) the rules and roles?
<--- Score
68. Are different versions of process maps needed to account for the different types of inputs?
<--- Score
69. How do you gather Materials Processing requirements?
<--- Score
70. How will variation in the actual durations of each activity be dealt with to ensure that the expected Materials Processing results are met?
<--- Score
71. What is the scope of Materials Processing?
<--- Score
72. Is the Materials Processing scope complete and appropriately sized?
<--- Score
73. What are the core elements of the Materials Processing business case?
<--- Score
74. Has your scope been defined?
<--- Score
75. Where can you gather more information?
<--- Score
76. If substitutes have been appointed, have they been briefed on the Materials Processing goals and received regular communications as to the progress to date?
<--- Score
77. What system do you use for gathering Materials Processing information?
<--- Score
78. How do you build the right business case?
<--- Score
79. What defines best in class?
<--- Score
80. What was the context?
<--- Score
81. What Materials Processing requirements should be gathered?
<--- Score
82. Is the Materials Processing scope manageable?
<--- Score
83. What baselines are required to be defined and managed?
<--- Score
84. How is the team tracking and documenting its work?
<--- Score
85. How have you defined all Materials Processing requirements first?
<--- Score
86. Why are you doing Materials Processing and what is the scope?
<--- Score
87. Are approval levels defined for contracts and supplements to contracts?
<--- Score
88. Are there different segments of customers?
<--- Score
89. What is the context?
<--- Score
90. How do you catch Materials Processing definition inconsistencies?
<--- Score
91. Have all basic functions of Materials Processing been defined?
<--- Score
92. How will the Materials Processing team and the group measure complete success of Materials Processing?
<--- Score
93. What are the dynamics of the communication plan?
<--- Score
94. Is the scope of Materials Processing defined?
<--- Score
95. What is the scope of the Materials Processing work?
<--- Score
96. Has the improvement team collected the ‘voice of the customer’ (obtained feedback – qualitative and quantitative)?
<--- Score
97. What specifically is the problem? Where does it occur? When does it occur? What is its extent?
<--- Score
98. What is in scope?
<--- Score
99. Is the current ‘as is’ process being followed? If not, what are the discrepancies?
<--- Score
100. How do you manage scope?
<--- Score
101. What are the Materials Processing use cases?
<--- Score
102. How and when will the baselines be defined?
<--- Score
103. Has the Materials Processing work been fairly and/or equitably divided and delegated among team members who are qualified and capable to perform the work? Has everyone contributed?
<--- Score
104. Is there a clear Materials Processing case definition?
<--- Score
105. How can the value of Materials Processing be defined?
<--- Score
106. Are the Materials Processing requirements testable?
<--- Score
107. Do you have a Materials Processing success story or case study ready to tell and share?
<--- Score
108. When is/was the Materials Processing start date?
<--- Score
109. Are roles and responsibilities formally defined?
<--- Score
110. How does the Materials Processing manager ensure against scope creep?
<--- Score
111. What are the rough order estimates on cost savings/opportunities that Materials Processing brings?
<--- Score
112. What information do you gather?
<--- Score
113. Scope of sensitive information?
<--- Score
114. Has anyone else (internal or external to the group) attempted to solve this problem or a similar one before? If so, what knowledge can be leveraged from these previous efforts?
<--- Score
115. Do the problem and goal statements meet the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound)?
<--- Score
116. In what way can you redefine the criteria of choice clients have in your category in your favor?
<--- Score
117. Is Materials Processing linked to key stakeholder goals and objectives?
<--- Score
118. What are (control) requirements for Materials Processing Information?
<--- Score
119. What Materials Processing services do you require?
<--- Score
120. Who is gathering information?
<--- Score
121. How would you define the culture at your organization, how susceptible is it to Materials Processing changes?
<--- Score
122. How are consistent Materials Processing definitions important?
<--- Score
123. What is the scope of the Materials Processing effort?
<--- Score
124. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
125. What sort of initial information to gather?
<--- Score
126. Is the improvement team aware of the different versions of a process: what they think it is vs. what it actually is vs. what it should be vs. what it could be?
<--- Score
127. What is the definition of Materials Processing excellence?
<--- Score
128. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?
<--- Score
129. Has a high-level ‘as is’ process map been completed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
Add up total points for this section: _____ = Total points for this section
Divided by: ______ (number of statements answered) = ______ Average score for this section
Transfer your score to the Materials Processing Index at the beginning of the Self-Assessment.
