Implementation of New Management Agile Technique ...

Harsimarjeet Khurana et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Implementation of New Management Agile Technique for Reducing Overtime and Increasing Customer Satisfaction HARSIMARJEET KHURANA ASSISTANT PROFESSOR Gurunanak Institute of Management and Technology Gujarkhan Campus, Model Town Ludhiana, Punjab, India

DR. J.S. SOHAL DIRECTOR Ludhiana College of Engineering and Technology Katanikalan Ludhiana, Punjab, India Abstract: This model has been implemented in one of the production unit located at Ludhiana. The model concentrates how the team members should function in order to improve organization performance in a continuously changing situation. The critical thought following this model is to minimize the problem of overtime and monitor the performance of team members. The implementation of model has shown excellent results in reducing overtime and performance of the team members increasing customer satisfaction. Keywords Overtime, Satisfaction, Scrum Introduction Since scrum is the old management agile technique for reducing overtime and increasing customer satisfaction it has flaws a. sprint time 30 b. scrum meetings once a day. Our paper has replaced this with new technique. To improve the existing management practices in an organization and to consistently identifying the deficiencies in the development process a model has been developed named as PEOR model (Performance Evaluation and Overtime Reduction). This model will efficiently work with small teams. It has been developed for managing the work in proper and systematic manner so as to avoid overtime , to monitor the performance of the employees regularlyand the most important is cost . Overtime means add to the cost also. If we are managing overtime we are managing the cost too. One day overtime means a loss to the production unit because the cost will be bear by the production unit only and not by the companies who has given the assignment. In order to remove this problem we made few changes in the process cycle. We conducted a study for 28 days (one iteration is for 28 days only) to see the effectiveness of the PEOR model. There are two motivations for this study. The first motivation is to increase the knowledge about PEOR and to see what pattern emerge when PEOR is used in an industrial setting. The second motivation came from the production unit itself. The production unit wants to increase quality and speed at which it could deliver the products. The production unit believed that PEOR could be beneficial but they don’t know how to adopt PEOR into their environment. In our study we compared the results of both before PEOR and after the introduction of PEOR. We decided to conduct a study for 28 working days just to see the impact of PEOR model on performance of the employees and reduction in overtime. Brief Process of PEOR Model In this model the master plan is made to accomplish the task within time frame for this master plan is divided into modules and for every module there is a supervisor. The meetings are held twice daily with supervisors of different modules and the main head for whom the assignment is being processed. In the morning meetings what will be accomplish today will be discussed and in the evening meetings follow up is taken by supervisors by the head of the organization and if there are any problems it is discussed there and then and solutions are also found or it can be in the next day morning meeting. On the last working day of the week the progress of

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 1 Jan 2011

238

Harsimarjeet Khurana et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

different modules is also discussed in the morning meetings so as to have a control on problem i.e. overtime (overtime= actual time given – time taken). Finally on the last day i.e. 28th day of iteration full four weeks work is compiled to see the status of the assignment. If the backlog is left then again second iteration will start and the same process will be repeated till the assignment is over. Material and Methods The research approach taken for this study is a quantitative research method. In PEOR model iteration is for 28 days only. The researcher is there to record the data according before PEOR and after PEOR Model. In one assignment we are using before PEOR model and in other assignment we are using PEOR Model. The assignment has to be completed in 28 days only. Data Collection and Methodology For the study the data was collected from two sources -a. Office hour time records b. Database records. Office Hour Records: Office hours are the hours that are spent at the workplace from 9 am until 7 pm i.e. 10 hours (including lunch time). The office hours reflect the expected time the workers have to do the production. To record the office hours the production unit has card system for all the employees. Time for entry and exit are recorded automatically. This is done on daily basis and the database is used for billing purpose, which is accurate. For the purpose of study only Sunday is considered to be holiday and it is filtered out during a data collection process. Database Records: The record for each day is entered in the database so that we can check the work assign to the workers, total time given, actual time taken and accordingly overtime is calculated. Daily assigned job should be completed on the same day. This database is updated on daily basis. In this section we will describe about the quantitative results. The assignments are carried out on the following dates: Starting and ending date for assignment one where old process is working are 01-02-2010 to 28-02-2010. Starting and ending date for assignment second where PEOR model is working are 01-02-2010 to 28-02-2010. For these periods of assignments the workers were same. To compare the periods before PEOR and after introduction of PEOR F-test and t-test were performed. The F- test was performed with the following Hypothesis: H0: There is no difference between variance of overtime worked before and after PEOR was introduced. H1: The Larger standard deviation in overtime before PEOR was introduced is significantly different from smaller standard deviation in overtime after PEOR was introduced. The t-test was performed with the following hypothesis. H0: There is no difference between mean percentage of overtime worked before and after PEOR was introduced. H1: The mean percentage of overtime worked before PEOR was introduced is greater than the mean percentage of overtime worked after PEOR was introduced. Results and Discussions Table 1

SD of over time

Probability with F-test

Before PEOR

After PEOR

PHASE I (CUTTING)

0.98319208

0.44320263

0.039714026

PHASE II(PRINTING) PHASE III(STITCHING) FINAL PHASE(INSPECTION)

2.42899156

0.752970309

0.007709599

2.041241452

0.744023809

0.014665949

2.316606714

0.577350269

0.044758903

Total

associated

4.77138E-08

According to table 1 the results showed that standard deviation before PEOR was introduced was greater than standard deviation after PEOR was introduced for all the phases The difference between variance before PEOR was introduced and after PEOR was introduced was significant for cutting at 3.97% level of significance, for printing at 0.77% level of significance, for stitching at 1.47% level of significance and for inspection at 4.48% level of significance. Whereas in total for all categories, variance

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 1 Jan 2011

239

Harsimarjeet Khurana et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

before PEOR was introduced was significantly different from variance after PEOR was introduced at 4.77138E08% level of significance. Thus indicating that there was more stability in terms of overtime worked after PEOR was introduced for all the categories. Table2

Mean % over time

PHASE I (CUTTING) PHASE II(PRINTING) PHASE III(STITCHING) FINAL PHASE(INSPECTION) Total

Before PEOR 10 25 21.66666667

After PEOR 3.125 8.125 7.5

28.33333333

5

Probability with t-test

associated

0.035656449 0.042960942 0.045147766 0.044312514 0.00013615

According to table 2 the t-test assumed that the variances of the period before and after the introduction of PEOR were not equal as shown by F-test. The results of t-test shows that the mean % overtime worked after PEOR was introduced was less than mean % overtime worked before PEOR was introduced was less than the mean % overtime worked before PEOR was introduced for all the categories. The difference between before and after PEOR was introduced was significant for cutting at 3.56% level of significance, for printing at 4.3% level of significance, for stitching at 4.51% level of significance and for inspection at 4.43% level of significance. Whereas overall mean difference between before and after PEOR was introduced was significant at 0.01% level of significance. The team showed less overtime after PEOR was introduced for all the phases Graphical Representation of Data The graphical representation of data is shown below a. Chart where old process is used i.e. before PEOR Model b. Chart where new process is used i.e. after PEOR Model.

Chart (A) BEFORE PEOR MODEL

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 1 Jan 2011

240

Harsimarjeet Khurana et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Chart (B) AFTER PEOR MODEL

Qualitative Results and Discussions Customer Opinion Discussion In this section verbal feedback was taken from the customer to get some idea of the differences before and after the introduction of PEOR. The overall feedback from the customer was positive. All the customers said that they would recommend using PEOR in future also. Customer was involved to see the development process. The customers were very satisfied. One of the customer said that there has been more consistency, transparency and coordination with the implementation of the PEOR. Another customer said that PEOR has involved them in the daily review and discussions. The customers also appreciated the concept of twice daily meeting because everyone knows what is required from them. Another customer said there is no doubt that the whole day is a trying but still the concept of twice daily meeting has lead to less misdirected development and more clear understanding of the both the requirement and the development process by both the customers and the process team. The twice-daily meeting has helped the customers and process team to visualize the product on daily basis rather than at the end of the product. Process Development team The product development team found that that introduction of PEOR is helpful because it gives clear picture of work completion and overtime on daily basis. Meetings were effective too Conclusion This model has proved to be excellent in case of overtime and to keep a check on the performance of the workers. In this model the workers should be permanent till the assignment is over. This is one of the limitations. The future work in this case can be to run this model where the workers are not permanent. We can study this and find out the effectiveness of PEOR model in this situation too. This model is still being implemented in this organization. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We are very grateful to the organization for helping us in implementing this model in their organization. We also thank them in co-operating with us and helping us throughout the process. REFERENCES [1]

Chris, M.; Frank.M. (2005): A Case study on the Impact of Scrum on Overtime and Customer Satisfaction, ADC '05 Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, pp 70-79

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 1 Jan 2011

241