See attached rubric, and prior submissions. Must flow with other submissions.

Measuring Performance

Identifiable variables in this case study are the four branch locations which are being examined for closure in order to create funds for a new branch in India. The four locations in consideration are Syracuse, Minneapolis, San Antonio, and Tampa. The decision should predominantly be based on which branch closure would best benefit the organization financially, this is reinforced when the president of the board stated “You can’t please all of the people all of the time. Sometimes profits come before personnel”. All data collected from this case study will need to be evaluated for each city regardless in order to make a final decision. The best way to evaluate the data would be to categorize each data point in order to determine whether it effectively supports a particular branch closing. This is the junction where there has been conflict between group members by disagreements and searching for faults within branches that are not their own branches, instead of concentrating on the issue at hand – which is to resolve the debate of which branch is least profitable.

To best remedy the conflict and complete the task at hand, a meeting should be held to review objectives in order to confirm all members are understanding of the project. When it has been ensured all members understand, each data point needs to be evaluated to determine which category each belongs to. Personal biases need to be placed aside during this evaluation to ensure the data is not also biased. A method needs to be in place in the event of further conflict, the best method would be to allow members to vote on a final decision once the data has been reviewed and explained to all members. Voting would be a good method to resolve the issue because it is a majority vote, not a unanimous vote.

An example below will demonstrate just how the members can organize the data on the branches in question. Highlighted areas will show the data point according to the category it belongs to. Green will exhibit points that support branch closure. Yellow will show points that are not applicable or to be considered. Red will demonstrate points that are not in support of branch closure.

Prior to the members approaching the board with the data collected showing which branch would be the best option for closure, the members should be sure to assess the conflict at hand and continue to collect data on the conflict as well as the cause of the conflict. In order to do this, the DMAIC model should be used by implementing the “D” portion of the model to focus on the conflict/issue. This method would require a problem statement to be identified and objectives to be made clearly. It is vital to ensure focus is on important and controllable factors. The problem statement should include a clear and concise detail of the issue, timeline of the issue, departments affected by the issue, processes or employees affected by the issue, and why the issue needs to be handled. A well stated problem statement would be: Phone Systems Inc. needs to determine which branch in the United States to close to ensure funds are available to open a new branch in India. Members have formed in order to cultivate a strategic plan to establish a new branch in India and determine which US branch should be closed. These members have met on several occasions but are still unable to agree on a decision, and conflict has since arisen because of this issue. These issues need to be resolved within the group in order to continue onward with the project of opening a new branch in India.

There are several key challenges the members face in moving forward. The Ishikawa diagram can be used in analyzing crucial variables surrounding the conflict of the members tasked with determining which branch to close. An Ishikawa diagram is vital tool that can be used in order to identify several causes for a problem. This diagram can also be used in order to configure ‘brainstorming’ among members of this task. The farthest right of the diagram lists a problem statement that details the issue at hand. There are sections that branch off that explore potential solutions to the issue. It should be noted that an Ishikawa diagram is a draft that can be edited during the ‘brainstorming’ process to update as members go along and come up with different ideas or solutions. This diagram should be openly accessible and kept in a way or place that members can edit it as needed.

The “A” stage of the DMAIC is to identify issues, potential causes, and the root cause of an issue. There would be no way to accurate define a specific issue or goal without this important detailed ‘define and measure’ phase. There also would be no possible way to measure any possible success without this phase. Based on the variables gathered from the case study, root causes include:

• Failure to properly follow objectives

• Conflict of interest in decision making due to members being employed at specific branches in question for closure

• No strategy has been identified in order to make this decision

• Lack of member leadership to guide members to reaching an agreement

Questions to be considered for stakeholders would include:

1. Can you clearly identify objectives for members?

2. Are there specific characteristics of a branch that make it more likely to be closed in the US?

3. Is the main concern for closure to be based on financials, employee size, location, or awards?

4. Is there any other way beside closure to establish a branch in India?

5. Will employees of the closed branch be re-located to another branch?

Questions I would ask members would include:

1. Can you pinpoint the cause of conflict?

2. Do you have any solutions to the conflict?

3. Could voting be an effective solution to the conflict?

4. Are you able to understand the objectives?

5. When thinking of closing a branch, are there any important factors you think should be considered?

By asking these questions, a discussion among members and stakeholders could potentially lead to a solution, as well as a better understanding of the issues at hand.

An important method to employ would be the “Five Why’s”. This phase aids in determining and identifying the root cause of an issue. This not only identifies the root cause of an issue but helps define the relationship between the issue and its cause. This method is a great tool to use in conflict because it is easily used without the use of statistical analysis.

1. Why are members reluctant to set aside biases in order to make a professional decision?

2. Why is the Mexico branch entirely out of the option for closure?

3. Why were members selected who are biased based on emotional ties to branches that are being considered for closure?

4. Why does a US branch need to be closed in order to fund the establishment of an India branch?

5. Why is the organization building in India?

These questions will assist in gathering further information needed to help members in building a strategy that will lead to solid decision and a more in depth understanding of the issue at hand. It is impossible to find a solution if there is no clear definition of the problem. In asking these questions, members should be encouraged to discuss the issue and possible solutions to resolve the issue.