Process Improvement for Courseware Development Scalability

A project charter was established to address this issue, aligning with the Lean Six Sigma process and engaging key stakeholders responsible for the necessary improvements. The primary goals were to:

• Document and address inefficiencies in the current process.
• Identify scalable solutions to meet production demands.
• Ensure the organization can fulfill expected contract obligations.
• Eliminate process complexities that could lead to defects.

Stakeholders & Project Plan

The project involved a cross-functional team, including process owners, financial sponsors, and key stakeholders. Using the Lean Six Sigma framework, we followed the five DMAIC stages: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control. While identifying solutions posed minimal challenges, resistance emerged early when socializing resource efforts for the existing process. It became clear that additional stakeholders needed to be involved for review and buy-in, as the existing process was driven by user interpretations and not necessarily how a seasoned expert would complete the process, which was faster and less complex.

Despite efforts to realign stakeholders during the initial Define, Measure, Analyze phases, similar challenges surfaced in the Improve and Control stages. Unforeseen approvals and process amendments due to the proposed solution caused delays, leading to frustration among the original team, who felt the exercise was just another example of a change management process gone wrong.

Recommended Planning Adjustments

Considering the readings related to project management and potential frameworks such as agile and design thinking, the following improvements to the process would increase the likelihood of success for subsequent projects:

As the analysis and improvement phases were completed, reassessing stakeholders became essential. As Watt (2014) emphasizes, understanding goals is crucial, but recognizing the resources required for each task is equally important. A key gap in our process was failing to identify those responsible for executing the new process, we focused solely on those completing the existing process and were unable to understand the needs of stakeholders for the new process. As a result, we overlooked the security team, which operates under an external mandate requiring strict documentation and change approvals for any deviations. This oversight led to execution delays and frustration, which could have been avoided by continuously reassessing resource needs at key milestones throughout the DMAIC process.

Clear communication lines were established between project stakeholders and contributors; however, the execution and adoption of the process could have benefited from a more comprehensive communication plan that extended beyond the immediate team. As Watt (2014) emphasizes, projects generate significant information, making it crucial to disseminate only what is necessary to avoid overwhelming external stakeholders. However, our team communicated too little and too late. We could have implemented and executed the process more efficiently by proactively engaging those responsible for adopting and benefiting from the new process. Instead, we missed opportunities to test the method in real-world scenarios, delaying its full adoption.

Conclusion

The project discussed in this article is considered closed and successful due to its recognized benefits. However, its adoption rate and the resources required to define the solution could have been improved with a more straightforward communication strategy and a reassessment of necessary stakeholders.

Considering the application of Design Thinking in Project Management, as Ben et al. (2017) explored, our organization’s implementation of Lean Six Sigma could benefit from a continuous feedback loop from projects utilizing this framework. Reassessing required stakeholders at key milestones can help mitigate resistance to change. Rather than relying solely on a guidebook reflecting our understanding of Lean Six Sigma at a single point in time, practitioners should integrate ongoing feedback from projects to adapt our implementation of the framework to meet our organizational needs.

References

Ben Mahmoud-Jouini, S., Midler, C., & Silberzahn, P. (2016). Contributions of design thinking to project management in an innovation context. Project Management Journal, 47(2), 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21577 

Indeed Editorial Team. (n.d.). 40 change management quotes to inspire the entire team. Indeed. https://ca.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/change-management-quotes

OpenAI. (2024). Kaizen event with teamwork, brainstorming, sticky notes, and vibrant collaboration. https://chat.openai.com/

Watt, A. (2014). Project management (2nd ed.). BCcampus. https://opentextbc.ca/projectmanagement/