DMADV for New Housing at the University of Miami

ContentServer.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Operations Management homework help >DMADV for New Housing at the University of Miami

Qiiiihiy E'lginecrinM. 18:299- ?23, 2006 Copyright r Taylor & FrariL'is Group. LLC ISSN: 0S98-2I12 print/1532-4222 online DOI: It).1080/08982110600719349

Taylor & Francis Ia/lor(.franci5 Croup

Designing New Housing at the University of Miami: A "Six Sigma"® DMADV/DFSS Case Study

J.A. Johnson and H. Gitlow Department of Munagcment Science. School of Business Administration, University of Miami, Coral Gahles, FL

S. Widener Department of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering University of Miami, Coral Gables. FL

E. Popovich Sterling Enterprises International, Inc., Boca Raton, FL

The "Six Sigma" management DMADV model is used in this paper to design a new dormitory concept at the University of Miami. It is intended to provide a roadmap for conducting a Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) project.

Keywords Case study: Design for Six Sigma; DFSS; DMADV; Six Sigma.

INTRODUCTION

"Six Sigma" management is the relentless and rig- orous pursuit ofthe reduction of variation in all critical processes in an organization. Us purpose is to achieve continuous and breakthrough improvements that impact the bottom line and increase customer satisfac- tion. Six Sigma management is an organizational initia- tive designed to create processes that produee no more than 3.4 defeets per million opportunities.

The two methods employed in Six Sigma initia- tives to achieve this high standard of quality are called the DMAIC (the Defme-Measure-Analyze-Improve- Control) method (Rasis et al.. 2002; vol. 15 no. 1 pp. 127-145), and the DMADV (Detme-Measure- Analyze-Design-Verify) method. The DMAIC method is used primarily for improvement of an existing

' "Six Sigma" is a registered trademark of the Motorola Corporation.

Address correspondence to Howard Gitlow, Professor of Management Science, School of Business Administration, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA. E-mail; [email protected]

product, service, or process, while the DMADV method is used primarily for the invention and innova- tion of modified or new products, services, or pro- cesses. This paper focuses on the DMADV method.

DEFINE PHASE

Introduction

The Define Phase of the DMADV model has five eomponents: establish the background and business case; assess the risks, benefits, and costs of the project; form the product development team; develop the project plan, and write the project charter.

Background and Business Case

The University of Miami has experienced rapid growth in student enrollment, a policy that stipulates that all ineoming freshmen must live on campus (unless they live with their family), and the wish of the presi- dent for a more residential campus created more demand than supply for on-campus housing. This is clearly seen by the portion of the University's mission and dashboard, shown in Table I.

A partial hst of potential projects is shown in the right-most column of Table 1. The potential projects are prioritized for action in a project prioritization matrix (see Tabie 2).

The project relating to the School of Business Administration with the highest weighted average from Table 2 is selected as a ''Six Sigma" project, as it has the most impact on the business objectives, in this case,

299

300 J.A. Johnson et al.

Tahle I The mission and selected portions of the dashboard for the University of Miami. "Mission Statement: The University of

Miami exists that human knowledge be treasured, preserved, expanded and disseminated and that the human mind, body and spirit be nurtured and strengthened through learning." Coiiivni Las! Modified on March 28. 2003

President

Key objectives

Improve student experiences

Improve the national ranking ofthe university

Improve inlerdisciplinar> research

Increase the university endowment

Key indicators

Number of students applying

Percent of students returning by semester

1-MR chart of national ranking

Number of / interdisciplinary

projects

Total value of the endowment by year

Provost

Key objectives

Increase the number of

Key indicators

Number of students

students living living on campus

Increase student resident retention rate

on campus by semester

Percentage of students retained each semester

Dean ofthe school of business

Key objectives

Increase the number of business students living on campus

Increase business student retention

Key indicators

Number of business students living on campus by semester

Percentage of business students retained by semester

Projects

Create more on-campus housing for business students (new housing)

Improve on- campus housing options for business students (housing renovation)

Tabh' 2 Six Sigma project prioritization matrix

Partial list of potential projects for business school

Weight Office wing New housing Housing renovations Business library

President s business objectives Improve national ranking Improve interdisciplinary

research Increase the endowment Improve student experience

Weighted average

0.4U 0.30

0.15 0.15 1.00

9 9

I 3 6.9

3 1

9 9 4,2

1 3

1 3 1.9

Designing New Housing at tho L'niversity of Miami 301

the Office Wing Construction, vî ith a score of 6.9. However, this project is near completion, so the Dean of the School of Business can start to set up the next project. New Housing Construction.

Risks. Benefits, and Costs of the Project

Risks

Table 3 shows a failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) for the new housing project that was created in a brainstorming session by team members. Each individual item was rated by (1) severity, (2) probabil- ity of occurrence, and (3) detectability, on a 1 to 10 scale. In each case, the scale is established so that 1 is the ideal state, that is, cheapest or least damaging, least likely to occur, and easiest to detect. Accordingly, a 10 is the most undesirable state, that is, expensive or heavily damaging, likely to occur, and difficult to detect. The three scores for each failure mode are multiplied to get a composite score ofthe risk, known as the Risk Priority Number (RPN). An RPN can range from 1 ( 1 x 1 x 1 ) to 1.000 (10 x 10 x 10), with higher numbers being more problematic risks.

In the dormitory case, team members established a plan to decrease risk. After the plan is put into place, the three component scores arc estimated again to compute a revised RPN,

The two major risks, obsolescence (RPN = 5 6 0 ) and design team dynamics (RPN - 448). can be avoided by planning flexible interiors that can be easily updated (revised RPN = 2!0) and maintaining a team environment (revised RPN = 192). respectively.

Benefits

The measurable benefits of new housing construc- tion can be broken down into two groups, financial and non-financia! benefits. Financial benefits include rental of the new rooms. However, the dormitory is planned to be a break-even operation (see Table 4).

Non-financial benefits would also be realized, for example, in potentially increased ratings from sources like Bu.siness Week and U.S. News and World Report. Another example is the positive feelings evoked from a physically apparent sign of growth, as the new build- ing stimulates interest and excitement.

Composition of the Team

The team comprised two members (Adam Johnson and Scott Widener). one advisor (Dr, Edward

Popovich). one Black Belt (Professor Howard Gitlow), and one Champion (Dean Paul Sugrue).

Project Plan

The fourth step in the Define Phase is to develop a project plan which has five components: opportunity statement, project objective, project scope, multi- generational product plan, and a Gantt chart. The purpose of the project plan is to define the project.

Opportunity Statement

The opportunity statement clarifies the opportu- nity the project provides toward bottom-line profits or customer satisfaction. It asks: "What is the pain that will be addressed by the project?'"

In the dormitory example, the University of Miami president stated her desire to create a more residential campus (see the dashboard in Table 1). The Dean of the School of Business would like to establish the School of Business as a top 50 business school. Cur- rently, there is a need to expand the facility and infra- structure to keep up with the escalating competition to become a top 50 business school.

Project Objectives

The project objective clarifies the goal of the pro- ject. In the case of the dormitory example, the project objective is to create a design for a high-class living facility that encourages learning and community aimed at executives-in-residence. MBA students, and junior and senior undergraduate business students. The facil- ity should increase the number of on-campus residents.

Project Scope

The project scope focuses the opportunity state- ment by considering the constraints on the project. The first issue considered by the project scope is resource constraints. Eor the dormitory project, the only constraints are a deadline for completing the design and a particular plot of land. The second issue considered by the project scope is obstacles, Eor the dormitory project, obstacles include confidentiality about the project, political struggles between key groups with vested interests, and an extremely diverse population that needs to be appeased with any newly designed facilities. The third issue considered by the project scope is financial constraints. Einancial constraints for the project are set by the construction

1 -

c-o u r/1 O

a.o D .

o • o o o

X " l J

lo od

ik el

Z a. ĉ

in n

u -a

> OJ

re n

or .r

an d

u ' « _ •

• - ^

:u ti

u X a j

Je si

o *-* bO

a j

^ . 2

a: o

c TO

— ( / ]

t: ef

f an

n i

• & .

'ra

1 -

«^ c aj £ O

00 c

" ^ </l I / ; 1—

— o o • • -

" ^ aj

^ %—

CO r - l ^—

• a

im e

c ^

X O

£ ^ Oil

- .E

" ^ TO

C 0 0 o c ^ UH

ae i

^ ^

In su

> ,

o i; o .—•

c r-;

;s ea

2P •5

s ttJ

^ y

00 c

-h l/l

a- xi JJ ra ^ 00 60 —

c n .

« o .5 aj

x: ,Si c ' ^ •3 T ;

^ P. = <u <=o

O o o

•o 3 c 2 iJ

a: Q

ara c

£ £

U 5

.5 ij i_

• o c

"ra

o lil

CL.

c o

II 'S X u= c

U-r

o c o

1) -a 3 u l

l i

q / l

I... 1)

• —

302

Designing New Housing at the University of Miami 303

Tahle 4 Finaneial estimates by year

Revenues by floor Single room rent per student 40 single rentals floor Total rent per floor

Debt service by floor 25.137 square feet per tloor S200 per square foot construction costs Construction cost per iloor ($5,027,400) 30-year bond (ii $"/<, interest rale

Net revenue by floor (Revenue less debt service)

Maintenance by floor 25.137 square feet per floor $6 per square foot

Net net revenue by floor (Net revenue less maintenance)

Net net revenue for building (7 floors)

S12.00D for year $480,000 per year S480.000 per year

$327,040 per year

$480,000 per year -$327,040 per year $152,960 per year

$150,822 per year

$152,960 per year

-$150,822 per year

$2,138 per year

$14,966 per year

budget and the project budget ($1,000). All expendi- tures must be cleared through the project's Black Belt.

Multi-Generational Product Plan (MGPP)

A MGPP is a method used to view the "entire picture" of a project. Table 5 illustrates the three categories of MGPPs.

In the dormitory project, it can be seen that the new facility is a cross between Generations I and 2. It is Generation I because there is some bleeding in the housing market as students leave campus to seek off- campus housing. However, it is Generation 2 because it develops and incorporates new technologies into an on-campus living facility. Consequently, the new facil- ity design will be treated as a Generation 2 project.

Gantt Chart

The final section of the project plan is to lay out the timeframe of the project using a Gantt chart.

Project Charter

A project charter identifies the market segments for a product, service, or process, as well as the mea- sure(s) of success with direction(s) and target(s). and a deadline. In the dormitory example, the project objective is to create a design for a high-class living facility that eneourages learning and community (the product) aimed at executives-in-residence, MBA students, as well as junior and senior undergraduate business students (the market segments) to increase

Table 5 MGPP categories and definitions

Generation MGPP generation MGPP generation 2 MGPP getieration 3

Vision

Product/service generations

Produet/service technologies and platforms

Stop bleeding in existing markets

Improved or less expensive existing features

Current leehnology

Take offensive action by filling unmet needs of existing markets

New major features

Current technology with relevant teclmological enhancements if needed

Take leadership in new markets

New products or services or processes

Current technology and development of new technology if possible

304 J.A. Johnson cl

(the direction) the number of on campus residents (the measure of success) by 280 students (the target) by July 15, 2003 (the deadline).

MEASURE PHASE

Introduction

The Measure Phase has three steps: seginent the market, design and conduct a Kano Survey, and use the Kano survey results as Quality Function Deploy- ment inputs to fmd Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQs).

Market Segmentation

The first step ofthe Measure Phase is to identify the market segments. In the dormitory example, the Dean of the School of Business Administration identified three distinct market segments for the nev̂ ' on-campus housing. These market segments are executives-in- residcncc. regular MBA students, and undergraduate business students. Executives-in-residence are indivi- duals that come to campus for one or two weeks to attend a concentrated class. Currently, no regular MBA sttidents live on campus.

Kano Survey

A Kano survey (Gitlow, 1999; Kano and Takahashi, 1979) is an instrument that collects data concern- ing the wants and desires of regular users of a potential product, service, and process and leads to the classification of said needs and wants into tacti- cally important categories. In the dormitory example, several key stakeholders of the current housing system at the University of Miami were interviewed to collect preliminary data on the needs ofthe proposed housing construction; they included two former Resident Mas- ters (faculty members who live in apartments inside dormitory buildings), the Facilities Director (maintains existing dormitories), the Director of Residence Halls (coordinates residential assignments, residential poli- cies, and other residential aftairs), and the Dean of the Business School. Focus groups were conducted, which consisted of a mixture of full-time MBA students and undergraduate business students. Additionally, data were collected on five-star hotels to address the needs ofthe executives-in-residence market segment.

Team members developed a Kano survey using the features (called cognitive images) identified from the above focus groups, (see Table 6). For a discussion of how to identify cognitive images see Gitlow (1999). The survey was then completed by a quota

Table 6 Partial Kano survey lor donnitory example

Feature or service

Single occupancy rooms

Individual bathrooms

Queen-sized bed

How would you feel if this feature or service was ineluded in a dormitory residence?

a) Delighted b) Expeet it and like it e) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it 0 Other a) Delighted b) Expect it and like it c) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it 0 Other a) Delighted b) Expect it and like it c) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it 0 Other

How would you feel if this feature or serviee was NOT ineluded in a dormitory residenee?

a) Delighted b) Expeet it and like it e) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it 0 Other ;L) Delighted b) Expect it and like it c) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it 0 Other a) Delighted b) Expeet it and like it c) No feeling d) Live with it e) Do not like it f) Other

What percent increase over the eost of a typical dorm room would you be willing to pay to have this feature or serviee?

a) 0% b) 0.5% c) 1% d) 2 % e) 3 %

a) 0% b) 0.5% c) 1% d) 2% e) 3 %

0 5% g) 10% h) 15% i) 20% j) 30% or more

f) 5% g) iO% h) 15% i) 20% j) 30% or more

0 5% g) 10% h) 15% il 20% j) 30% or more

Desii>nin}; New Housing at the University of Miami 305

sample of 295 regular MBA and undergraduate busi- ness students collected by class section.

There are six different Kano categories, which are formed by looking at the difference between the responses of the first two questions on the Kano survey. These six categories are:

• One Dimensional (O)—user satisfaction increases proportional to performance in both the positive and negative directions.

• Must Be (M)—user is unsatisfied with low perfor- mance but indifferent to high performance.

• Attractive (A)—user is indifferent to low perfor- mance but excited by high performance.

• Reverse (R) the researchers' prior view is the oppo- site of what was found, meaning that the user is satisfied with low performance and dissatisfied with high performance.

• Indifferent ( I ) ^ t h e user has no feelings about pre- sence or absence of the object in question.

• Questionable (Q) the user provided contradictory responses to a particular cognitive issue.

For a discussion of how to classify the cognitive images on the Kano survey into their Kano categories see Gitlow(I999).

A cotnplete Kano quality categorization of the cognitive images, or features, and their expected per- centage price increase for all market segments is listed in Table 7.

Table 8 shows the Kano quality categorizations of the cognitive images by Kano quality category and expected cost increase, for each market segment.

The cognitive images classified into the I-R-Q Kano quality categories do not present any benefit to the indi- viduals in a market segment. Consequently, they are eliminated from consideration in future designs. The cognitive images classitied into the O-M-A Kano qual- ity categories provide an array of features that need to be considered in future designs, as they positively impact the market segments.

Quality Futiction Deployment (QFD)

Quality Function Deployment is a tool used to build the "Voice ofthe User."" in this case the cognitive images, into the design o f a product, service, or pro- cess. Table 9 is an excerpt from the Q F D tables, which shows the relationships between the rows, or cognitive images, and the columns, or features. These strong one-to-one relationships between the cognitive images and the features occur because the cognitive images

are the features needed to fulfill customer require- ments. For example, the cognitive image associated with providing each room with individual climate con- trots requires rooms to be built with individual climate controls. This structure caused the features, now clas- sified as CTQs. to be "present or not present" vari- ables. Table 9 indicates that Single Occupancy rooms are very important to all market segments. This is evi- denced by the high normalized weight in the Single Occupancy Room column.

ANALYZE PHASE

Introduction

The Analyze Phase contains four steps: Design Generation, Design Analysis. Risk Analysis, and Design Model. In this case study, the aim of the Ana- lyze Phase is to develop several high-level dormitory design concepts. In addition to this, risk assessments will be prepared for each design. Usually, nominal values are established for all CTQs; however, in the dormitory example, all of the CTQs are either present or absent, and consequently, do not have nominal values.

Design Generation

Table 10 depicts three designs generated in the Analyze Phase. "Undergraduate Preferences" depicts the design selected by undergraduate students via the Kano Questionnaire, "Graduate Preferences" depicts the design selected by graduate students via the Kano Questionnaire, and "Composite" depicts the design with all ofthe O-M-A CTQs from the Kano Question- naire.

The Analyze Phase utilizes design generation tech- niques such as Lateral Thinking {De Bono. 1992). TRIZ (Altshutler. 1996). and brainstorming techni- ques. The dormitory project used brainstorming to generate two additional designs. It was determined that the simplest design considered should be the equivalent of the nicest room currently available on-campus; therefore a study of the room was performed. The design of the room is generalized in Table 11. It is referred to as "Eaton Hall," the name of the building housing the rooms. Another design promotes academic success by including "business-related" features and services. This design is called the Business Suite design. (Table II). All features not included in the Business Suite desicn were then deemed as luxury items which

306 J.A. Johnson et al.

Tahle 7 Kano Survey results for all market segments

Cognitive images Largest Kano category E (percent increase in pay)

Single occupancy rooms Individual bathrooms Qucen-sizcd bed Broadband internet integrated iiudio system Intcgriiled headphone jacks Television Telephone Cordless telephone Addilionyl phone services Personal computer rental service Shared common printer Large corner desk Executive desk chair Additional desk chairs Climate control by room Full-size bathtub Microwave Small refrigerator Kitchenette Appliance rental service VCR DVD player Carpet Tile Enforced quiet areas Vacuum cleaner rental service Shared common vacuum cleaner Accessible roof Security guard Laundry facility by floor Iron and ironing board Optional laundry service Optional maid service Concierge Reserved convenient parking place Competitive admissions (vs. conventional assignment) Admission based on GPA Admissions for business students only Admissions for junior level and up only Segregate residents by class level Armoire Coffee table High-quality linens Option to rent by semester

One Way (25.6%) Attractive (37.5%) Attractive (56.8%) Attractive (36.4%) Indifferent (49.3%) IndilTcrent (65.3%) Attractive (54.5%) Attractive (34.2%) Attractive (49.3%) Attractive (60.0%) Indifferent (61.8%) Attractive (44.3%) Attractive (54.8%) Attractive (53.4%) IndilTerent (47.1%) Must Be (43.7%) Attractive (29.6%) Attractive (31.0%) Attractive (32.4%) Attractive (45.1%) Indifferent (47.8%) Attractive (40.0%) Attractive (60.3%) Attractive (33.3%) Indifferent (50.7%) Indifferent (46.4%) Indifferent (50.7%) Attractive (39.1%) Attractive (42.6%) Must Be (33.8%) One Way (30.4%) Indifferent (57.4%) Attractive (47.8%) Attractive (43.3%) Attractive (35.3%) Attractive (48.0%) Indifferent (53.3%) Indifferent (38.7%) Reverse (25.7%) Indifferent (43.8%) InditTercnt (44.6%) Attractive (43.8%) Indifferent (61.6%) Indifferent (48.0%) One Way (30.7%)

6.58% 5.75% 2.99% 1.65% 0.49% 0.37% 1.74% 0.60% 0.66% 1.19%

NA 0.69% 0.53% 0.56% 0.42% 3.10% 1.80% 1. 17% 1.61% 3.83%

NA 0.69% 0.49% 0.69% 0.59% 0.74%

NA 0.63% 1.36% NA

1.11% 0.57% 1.36% 1.66% 1.02% 1.98% 0.27% 0.2 i % 0.77% 0.28% 0.34%

NA 0.36% 0.45% 1.33%

led to the renaming ofthe "Composite" design as the "Luxury Suite" design.

In summary, there are five room designs posited:

• Undergraduate Preferences—This design includes only the features that are deemed as "One-Way."

"Attractive." or "Must-Be" via the undergraduate responses in the Kano Questionnaire. Gradtiate Preferences— This design includes only the features that are deemed as "One-Way." "Attrac- tive." or "Must-Be" via the graduate responses in the Kano Questionnaire.

-a

o :; C —

3 ^

o o ou

III

o t; o =3 ^

a- ?3

• - O

.li 3

o U

r-i d d d < z rr *N r'j pd d d —

lO *N Tf rt — d d — c c — d d d d r - i r i — — — d — —

o < < < - -

00 r̂; p p p p rn -^ d d d d d d

o < < o - < - s <

d d d d r-i r̂ r-i r̂ i d

r>( p (^ (N — d

r-i 00 rn — p d — — _; -̂

< <z

00 so p r̂ n-l fN — d

O < < <

o rn _; d

00 r-i d r-i

^ Ŝ ô < 00 iJ-i t ^ — O

<̂ d d -rt d

'^ â r~- p (-1 d d —

z d d d d —

O O < < < -

£oo

iy5

ra 0^

o a

u c o a -a o cJ=l O

a j=

I IS I H -z — y o "O fO

= £ H P U <

c ra

pp li

< >

^^ Q

Q s- u H

t i

q u

307

ra 3 13

O •B ^

c o ^ ra ra

o i*

• a 3

c o U

E o o. o

-3 au

< So

- < -

- <

— O 5̂ d " " ) O —'

- < < < O

'i Z d ri d —• Z , O V * -vO

rn Ô —

, o ...o ^o

p d

— rn — — O "-.

- < < ^ -

d — —; —

- < < O O - < < < < - - < O

5 Z - d d d -^

- <

d — d

< - O -

1 ^ IU P

it iv

it u i

o ^ u

ie a

E 3 ^ j

ra |>

c .y 2 > c

K O _ o i2 -ac 2i5 i " - _ ^

C/3

- '-J 3 -C o o

•

Oi) c

id i

1 . . .

1=1

ra o

al l

a i

c o D. O

'> IU I/I

al m

c c c . O

rg e

• r t= o

> •J-l

la ce

^ '

1 -

ti ti

n. B

is si

= >>

X) ~

. ^ ^ <L. c r c

X O

308

i. — ou o

un.

o ir

lu jv

c o ra bl

1 -

s §

o X 3

75 o

^ y

f ^ l ' O ' ^ r f ' T O O V i ^ . ' : ^ — r^irnoOr-^Ov

i ?

o c o c o o o o o c o

O O O O O O O O O O O O C O — C — O O — — —

O O O — a^ C; = • 0 0 0 0 0 0

O O O i > — O — — O O O O O O

O O O v O O O O O O O O O O O O

O s O v O O O O O O O O O O O O

O O O O O O O r ^ . O

o o o o o o o o o o o

< 0 0 C 2 0 C 2 O 0 O 0 O 0 Q —

^ ^ ^ " ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ • " " • ^^D ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - ^ ^ ^ ^_J

O fO — — O

o E >- o

l l

c > 1/1

• a

X •o N

C ra

ra O

C o . ,

'E c- x: £ = _aj D. 5 ^ 2i ra J : 5 1/1 := ra

^ S .9 c

H O < Q-

t j

o -a j ^ "^ o C , i/> 11 J -

p 1- oj 2 o o > c

- i <J -ji: o

"z: o

X ra

S -̂ _ ^ N

Pill UJ < U U-

•D 3 ra •B ̂ B

— O O O —

•a 00 O .E c .i^ O

ra '^

„ E c ^ij ra ra

S c '̂ O 3 '-̂

(U•15 15 £?"5 ^e c u .2 .2 '(J

- I O O

• — irt

3 i2 03 U

ô H. O

> on

o Z

309

310 J.A. Johnson et al.

Tahle 10 CTQ relationships between target markets

CTQ (feature or service) Undergraduate preterenees Graduate preferences Composite

Single occupancy rooms Individual bathrooms Quccii-sized bed Broadband internet Television unit Telephone unit Cordless telephone unit Additional phone services Personal computer rental service Shared common printer Large corner desk Executive desk chair Additional desk chairs Climate control by room Full-size bathtub Microwave Small refrigerator Kitchenette Appliance rental service VCR DVD player Carpet Enforced quiet areas Shared common vaeuum cleaner Accessible roof Security guard Laundry facility by floor Optional laundry service Optional maid service Concierge Reserved convenient parking Place Admissions for business students only Segregate students by class level Armoire Option to rent by semester

• Eaton Hall—This design includes only the features of the nicest dormitory rooms currently available on campus.

• Business Suite—This design includes only the fea- tures and services that have large contributions to business activities.

• Luxury Suite—This design includes all of the fea- tures that were deemed as "One-Way," "Attractive," or "MusI-Bc" by any of the participating market segments via the Kano Questionnaire.

Note that the Hve designs do not consider common area designs, just the rooms themselves. However, all designs will share the same common area design within the building.

Design Analysis

The five designs are graded on six criteria deter- mined by project team members through brainstorm- ing using a Modified Pugh Matrix (Pugh. 1991), with Eaton Hall serving as a baseline. The six criteria are:

• Willingness of Customer to Pay More—Luxuries come at a price that must be evaluated with respect to customer price sensitivity. This information can be determined by the Kano Questionnaire. This information is included in Table 12.

• Low Repair Frequency—This is a general compari- son to the baseline that answers the question: Will

Designing New Housing at the University of Miami 311

Tahle II Alternative room designs

CTQ (feature or service)

Single occupancy rooms Individual bathrooms Queen-size bed Broadband internet Television unit Telephone unit Cordless telephone unit Additional phone services PC rental serviee Shared common printer Large corner desk Executive desk ehair Additional desk chairs Climate control by room Full-Size bathtub Microwave Small refrigerator Kitchenette Appliance rental service VCR DVD player Carpet Enforced quiet areas Shared common vacuum cleaner Accessible roof Security guard Laundry facility by floor Optional laundry serviee Optional maid serviee Coneierge Reserved convenient parking place Admis.sions for business students only Segregate residents by elass level Armoire Option to rent by semester

Eaton hall

Business suite

Luxury suite

this de.sign increase the frequency of needed repairs over that of the baseline? Ease of Repair—This is a general comparison to the baseline that answers the question: Will this design introduce CTQs that will unduly burden current campus employees in repair and maintenance work? Replacement Frequency—Does the design introduce many CTQs that need yearly replacement? Ease to Clean and Common Maintenance—Do any of the introduced CTQs require an inordinate amount of maintenance and cleaning? As an exam- ple of this criterion, fish tanks would score a low grade on this criterion, as they require significant upkeep, whereas plastic plants would score high, as they only require an occasional dusting.

• Low Cost/Benefit Ratio—This criterion considers the cost of the design and tries to match the soft ben- efit of appreciation of current university students and the value as a selling point to future students.

The willingness ofa customer to pay more for a dormi- tory facility is first broken down by individual CTQs in Table 12. The calculations assume that the current cost of an Eaton Hall dormitory room is $875 per month. Given ihis cost structure, the expected values of the customers" willingness to pay additional money for CTQs can be determined from their input from the Kano Questionnaire. Team members graded each CTQ on a - I to -Hi scale. A zero can be assumed as a break-even value on the customers" willingness

• - . ^

• ^ c ' - •—•

t ; n <u 1 -

§ - <- 'y. -^ r-

c o O

OJ 55 ra

a UJ

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

x x x x x x x x

O O C O O — C O

•n ^ —•

O O — — — O O C : o I

O rn O oc r i

oc — — ~ — — r n i / ^ r - i o C ^ O ^ ^ - • — ^ r - - ; r - i o i » ^ ^ O ^ C ' ^ ' ^ r ^ i l — l / - l O ' T | • ^ n • ^ • ^ D y ^ t ^ t ^ t o r - i ^ - — m * - o o

(/J t ^ &« LA {/I

d d d d --̂ i — — —̂ r̂ . d

, o •< •< ' ^ "-r " ^ -<: "-vv^ o^ c^ o^ O-. e^ 6^ o^ ^ ' / ^ oc ' ^ 1-1 r-1 r̂ j O

i ^ r - - \ o ^ T t r t o i d rn oc Tt . o- ^

^ v-1 u-1 ^ rn (̂ 1 — — — _ TT — CJ 4> U -— '^^ O

^ < < < ^ S < < < < = < < <

o I

.' X

•£ ^ 5 ^

C IJ

o c a x IJ —

OJ 3

a G u ra

1 -

So "ra c

.s ac o B B o o

• n

•§ 1 . ,

o o OJ

1 -

'ra JZ o

O • o • J >

• J

- : ^

0) • o

ra j ^

it i

B o o

2>ra

ra - ^ >

00 (L> >-

c c a ^

H O < X ra

312

X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X

X X X X X 5

o o d

o o —'•

o oc o

o c c

o —' o

o o c

c o c

d o o c

o —

o o

— 1/5 — to

— •jT O^ — •rf OO r-

z ^

o B

'—̂ c o

U i

3 CO

si ne

i c p

1 o

3 CO

[ / ^

er e

pr ef

pi"j

• a

"o B

er e

pr ef

BO 1 —

" ^ ra

c O

E at

o B

'5 1/1

si ne

3 t>0

— • ^ r- O O <

stj Q-- ^ L'J r-p r-j

(-1 0 0 • [...J rn lO •S p -^ S S Ci QJ -^^ --^ (D O 1>

, > O ^ . > . > . > •—' CD " : i *—<•*.-»*—*

u 12 ^ L L- î S "̂ C ^ S E

(4 4.

6' 'e

n t

tf ei

•5

•--?

iv e

ac t

I -

a^ r- O rr,

>. ra

^ < o

cr p _2J

§1

ra 3

; * ,

i / i

ti o

Ŝ

nt a

ra L-

ti o

[lc i

a. c

E: o

> QJ QJ

. 3

(2. c

'i7 t/^

• a 3

t / i

c O o u

F o_

• a c ra

313

314 J.A. Johnson et

to pay more while a - 1 reflects that the University would lose money if it provided the CTQ. This cost recovery is based on the Total Life Cycle Cost (TLCC) of the CTQs (features and services). While these TLCCs for the CTQs could not be precisely estimated, a general consensus regarding TLCC recovery was determined from expert advice. For instance, tenants are expected to be willing to pay approximately $63.75 per year for a cordless phone. Cordless phones have a life expectancy of approximately one year in a dormitory environment. Given that, the TLCC should be recovered on a yearly basis. In this example, the TLCC is very near the expected value of the amount tenets are willing to pay for that feature, meaning that it "graded out" at zero. The largest portion of the TLCC of a parking place would be the coupons paid on the bonds that finance the parking place. Therefore, the expected value of the amount the customers are willing to pay should exceed the coupons needed to cover the 30-year bonds that would finance the parking places. By considering TLCC and the length of a life time for the feature or service, a perpetual recovery can be predicted. Any "grades" below zero are a pre- diction of an under-recovery and any "grades" above zero are a prediction of an over-recovery. It should also be noted that the ""grades" are not integer values and represent the likelihood of recovery and not the magnitudes of recovery, although there is a relation- ship between the two. For instance, a CTQ can be graded at 0.5 to indicate that the likelihood of over- recovery is positive but not as likely as another CTQ graded at 0.7. The opposite is true for negative grades. The sums of those grades are then standardized and

used as an input into the Pugh Matrix for the different designs. To further illustrate this concept consider the following example:

The Kano surveys indicate that students are willing to pay an additional 3 % in rent if they are furnished a queen-sized bed as opposed to a twin-sized bed. This amounts to an estimated value of $287.77 per year. Now, the marginal TLCC o(^ furnishing a queen-sized bed as opposed to a twin-sized bed should be consid- ered. Given the conservative estimate ofa three-year life span for the bed. an additional $863.31 (3 x $287.77. ignoring interest effects for simplicity of example) should be willingly generated by the patrons of the dormitory due to the added vaiue of furnishing a queen-sized bed. The addiiional cost incurred due to upgrading this provision from that o f a twin-sized bed should fall well below $861.31, and therefore, the Uni- versity has a very favorable probability that they can fully recover the cost of the queen-sized bed via rent. This favorable probability of cost recovery is repre- sented with a score of 0.8. indicating that an over-recov- ery is actually likely. This score is also summed into the following raw values: "Sum of Undergraduate Prefer- ences." "Sum of Graduate Preference." and "Sum of Luxury Suite." It is excluded from the other two sum- mations because the Eaton and Business Suite designs do not include a queen-sized bed. The summations are then standardized by dividing all sums by the vaiue of the largest sum. These standardized sums are then used as inputs in the Modified Pugh Matrix (Table 13) in the row labeled "Willingness of Customer to Pay More" as a substitute for the usual + / s / - notation. This change in notation will be discussed below.

Table 13 Modified Pugh matrix

Criteria to evaluate designs

Willingness of customer to pay more

Low repair frequency Ease of repair Replacement frequency Ease to clean and common

maintenance Low cost/benefit ratio Sum of positives Sum of negatives Difference Weighted sum of positives Weighted sum of negatives Weighted difference

Baseline Eaton

0.09

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.02 0.00 0.02

Undergraduate

0.70

- 0 . 1 0 - 0 . 1 0 - 0 . 5 0 - 0 . 3 0

1.00 1.70

- 1 . 0 0 0.70 0.40

- 0 . 1 4 0.27

Designs

Graduate

0.80

- 0 . 1 0 - 0 . 1 0 - 0 . 6 0 - 0 . 3 0

LOO L80

- 1 . 1 0 0.70 0.43

- 0 . 1 5 0.28

Business

0.26

0.00 0.00

- 0 . 4 0 - 0 . 1 0

1.00 1.26

- 0 . 5 0 0.76 0.30

- 0 . 0 7 0.23

Luxury

1.00

- 0 . 2 0 - 0 . 2 0 - 0 . 7 0 - 0 . 4 0

1.00 2.00

- 1 . 5 0 0.50 0.48

-0.20 0.27

Criteria weights

5.00

3.00 2.00 3.00 3.00

5.00 21.00

Standardized criteria weights

0.24

0.14 0.10 0.14 0.14

0.24 LOO

Designing New Housing at the University of Miami 315

Also note that the column "Year Sum" assumes that the room is rented out for 11 months. All rental services are graded out at zero because theoretically, the University can match the price and inventory to the demand. All CTQs with a price close to zero, yet students are willing to pay for, are assigned a grade of + 1 . An example of one of these features is admis- sions for business students only. The selective admis- sions have no direct cost, yet students are willing to pay for it.

The standardized values in the bottom of Table 12 provide the only calculated input for the Modified Pugh Matrix in Table 13>\ see "Willingness of custo- mers to pay more" row. The other criteria were graded on holistic level rather than one feature at a time, using the Eaton design as the baseline. As such., Eaton earned a score of zero for those respective criteria. The other designs were then compared to Eaton and comparatively graded on the five criteria. For example, the cell Graduate/Low-Repair Frequency has a value of - 0 . 1 0 because the Graduate Design included addi- tional features that are expected to require repair more frequently than the features included in Eaton. The Luxury graded out at —0.20 on this feature because it contained even more additional features that are expected to require frequent repair. These criteria were then weighted to composite out a final series of differ- ences between the designs, and the weights shown were then standardized for multiplication back against the criteria to composite a final picture as to what would be perceived as the best design.

The Modified Pugh Matrix results with the realiza- tion that the Graduate Preferences concept is the best concept, with Undergraduate and Luxury concepts being possible substitutes.

Risk Analysis

A Hazard Analysis was used to study the risks associated with each CTQ. This required the team members to analyze the "hazard severity" for each CTQ using the following scale:

• Class 1: Neghgible—Will not result in personal injury or property damage

• Class 11: Marginal—Can be counteracted or con- trolled without personal injury or major property damage

• Class III: Critical Will cause personal injury or major property damage

• Class IV: Catastrophic—Will cause death, severe personal injury, or severe property loss

A full hazard analysis is depicted in Table 14. The Hazard Analysis reveals seven Class IV hazards:

• Single Occupancy Rooms—Potential lack of help in disabling circumstances

• Kitchenette—Potential Fire • Microwave—Potential Fire • Appliance Rental Service— Potential Fire • Individual Bathrooms—Potential lack of help in

disabling circumstances • Full-Size Bathtub—Potential lack of help in dis-

abling circumstances • Accessible Roof—Potential Falls

There are two primary types of actions to counter these hazards. There are actions that reduce the poten- tial of hazards occurring and there are actions that remove the possibility ofthe hazards. It is believed that the tire hazards can be adequately controlled with a fire control system, and that single occupancy room hazards are bearable being that it is common for uni- versities to offer single occupancy rooms. However. the accessible roof hazard is harder to control. This "Graduate Preferences" design excludes this feature while "Undergraduate Preferences" and "Business/ Luxury Suite" designs do not. This is a continuation of the evidence revealed in the Pugh Matrix that the "Graduate Preferences" design may be the most suita- ble because it will eliminate the hazards of falls and suicide attempts. However, it should be noted that other solutions will continue to be considered, such as having a roof that is semi-accessible, as it could be used for various formal functions.

Design Model

Finally, a model has to be put forth that captures the leading design, that is, the "Graduate Preferences" design. The model was created with Broderbund's 3D Home Architect 4.0 and is depicted in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows a room layout with the dimensions intentionally not included. However, it is within range of what is expected to be available for a single room.

DESIGN PHASE

Introduction

Tbe Design Phase has four steps: constructing a detailed design, converting CTQs into Critical to Pro- cess elements (CTPs), estimating the capabilities ofthe CTPs in the design, and preparing a verifieation plan.

' * "ra •^ c ^ ra

II N

ti ve

u IU 1 -

:iv e

E bl

e ;s

< •

h o

or y

• £

o D

o i—

1 -

U IB

U J O a

lo ne

ra _>. "ra • ^

c o a.

b li

n g

ra '•B ^^ c ra

• —

ee s

c ra

ir e

id en

S3.

:i u

g 5

C L • -

11 C

ra "O -J

.2 E ra c

"O "^

o .2 c .=i § ch O .ii , ^ O

P o p o P o P o

O Q a, ?: a

. i a E ra

u o

T 3 != ra t n O

.5 c o a a r -

~-3 -yi -Ji

cOJ -o ĉ

o a.

c1 ) T 3

cdJ

• o c '~^ o H.ttj : ^

j -

c1 ^

o IU

n o *^ o Q . u

c o

— ±1 "

c o

>s o crac 3

o s ra Q.3 U

ec u

o n

lo oi

c o

is i

;* uH

c o

is i

u H

*< V >̂ Jl^

3 ^

'I 1 o •-

1 O

>.u

cu pa

"Sj

(75

E oo

ns f

o r

ss io

•m e t

:s o

n l}

• re

si d

g a

i n OX)

s le

ve l

lo nt

ro cl

as It

e c

E o

>. a. ra

1 u

n it

lO IS

_ a j

ye r

pl a

a : O

c o

es s

X !

c o D.-^ *-*

o c

E ra (JC- w

"2 "c o U C o

^ o ^ o 3 O 3 O

< <

^ ' XI

-o 3

CL U

o ra

& c ra •J c

•E E

316

c -r o -̂

o o o P •? Cl- Q . Cl. OJ ' - ^ O c o o.

o CL

u. lu T3 P QJ

(M)

•Ji

ro l

eo n

p 0

1 "ra

eh a

ILJ U .

X I

x: CJ

— >•

_ra U U O U U

E o

E O o 1 -• , ,

c 'E 3

m E *

Id in

'5 X)

U c

"5"p ra

c c

cn a j

"ra ,'ra

• ^

cn O a

HJ bl) ra E ra-o 1

DJj

o o u.

1 ^

P O 1 -

o o i l P

' p u< 3ca

•Jl

Id in

3 X)

t .

o • a p ra

p o

"ra -^

•Xi

c a.

' 3 ,ra

SJ) p

3 u o CJ

c pra

Ii n

X i ra

o OJ CJ P ra

TO - g U. :^

p ra P

o a.

3 p

ra C a o a.

ra ' p 0

a u . C C M

3 cn

ra p

C QJ

I—'.

ra u

> i

XL CU

"ra

E O

X I fU

u E1

• n o

c -o o Z

D, O Q . D. ra c

3 r/l

ra p

ra X3

c O

p o

p o po

ĉ S OJ CJ

o E 2 •^ p

QJ CJ

O QJ I S 8

O O

<U O

g CJ

n n e

o CJ

c ra E u a c o z

a is _ra 'y !̂ ra I/; D . - - ?3 p2 ^

3 -E p "

a s c o

s o U

3c E c U

.t: c

C o a. p

iri 1 ra -O

QJ x : 2 x: P > u P CJ ra

' - ^ 2 ^ XI

? "̂ .5 "S "S CJ (J .1-1 o ra QJ T 3 ^ X ) C

LU < CD

3 a E p ra c ocn u QJ

a j ^CJ

QJ cn

QJ Ul

X I CJ Ul

rax : 1/}

c: u ,

a c

E p

5 CJ

p ••J

O 'ra CJ M

II3 J

' '-

E cn

l l 1> D

U R

' ^

a j

ta i '

c QJ

3 "3

"2 "-

h ro

OJ £

317

— H

IS H

>. OJ

' J

eg • >

ar d

s an

d g

3 O 1 -

: b

ac xt

en si

c 3 O u ou

..^

: b

ac ch

ec ks

xt en

si ve

ch ec

k s

an d

h ec

k -i

a j I -

'5 a-

o u

an d

he ck

-i n

L-i

"3cr

o u

t C

h ec

k -

LJJ

-3

O . ^ -

-S' ^ £

I'I'l "11 c 'S .2 § .2

- J O O

o l p. 5

is 3

T3 3 (u o

i: =̂ TO >

c O

c 3

V S > 00

O O

• a c

— D.

I-

ru I

o 55t / i aj CJCJ

•B •yi OJ

0 0 c

-rt

i n

'£ • |

•0

IJ : :

p u.

"c UJ

li bl

c cc

es s

n v

P -au

es er

\ la

d n

g p ar

m es

o t l

c &!

OJ t-

on ci

318

Designing New Housing at the Lniversity of Miami 319

Tahle 15 Building facilities chariicterisiics by design type

Figure I. Room layout.

CTPs are revised definitions of CTQs that are measur- able using statistical methods. In the dormitory exam- ple, the CTQs. such as inclusion of a queen-sized bed, are not easily converted into data measurable in Defects Per Million Opportunities (DPMO). As such, for purposes of this case study. CTQs and CTPs are interchangeable terms that will refer to cither the inclu- sion or exclusion oi^ the studied features.

Construction of a Detailed Design

The design phase develops a detailed design of the actual product, service, or process to be delivered. In

CTQ (feature or service) Undergraduate Graduate

Luxury suite

Single occupancy x rooms

Individual bathrooms x Climate control x

by room Full-size bathtub x Kitchenette x Carpet x

X X

the dormitory case, the product to be delivered is a design concept, not the actual dormitory, and as such, detailed specifications will not be stipplied. As an exam- ple. Figure I explicitly removed all dimensions from the floor plan, as the idea ofthe floor plan is the actual out- put. Whether the room is 19 feet long or 21 feet long is more the concern of the architect given other external restrictions such as available land area and building codes, as well as other stakeholders who will take the outputs of this project in the Verify Phase.

The physical facilities requirements of the room, by design, are shown in Table 15, as these would be permanently placed into the room.

The room layout shown in Figure I is developed from Table 15. and is going to be fixed into place once the concrete forms are poured. Note that this floor plan shows a bathtub in the bathroom, despite the fact that the graduates preferred to not have a bathtub. Given that the single rooms, such as those in Eaton Hail, have bathtubs, this is not a significant change. Furthermore, the eost of a bathtub is not very high relative to the cost of tiling an entire shower; therefore to remain generie and standardized, all bathrooms will be fitted with bathtubs.

Given that the physical constraints ofthe building are not all that relevant in the design., the primary pro- blem becomes that of furnishings. The Kano survey determined the furnishings that belong in each room. Table 16 shows the listing of the furnishings that will be placed in eaeh style of room.

Table 16 shows that these furnishings are also very similar between all three ofthe available options. The difference among furnishings for the three designs is small, so a standardized room closely resembling the Luxury Suite appears to be the best option.

The final portion of the dormitory that must be designed in the common areas. Many of the common area CTQs were highlighted by the Kano survey and discussions with stakeholders. For example, there

319

320 J.A. Johnson et al.

Tahle 16 Furnishings by design type

Table IS Services desired by design type

CTQ Luxury CTQ Luxury (feature or service) Undergraduate Graduate suite (feature or service) Undergraduate Graduate suite

Queen-stze bed Television unit Telephone unil Cordless telephone-unit Large corner desk Executive desk chair Additional desk chairs Microwave Small refrigerator Kitchenette VCR DVD player Armoire

must be some sort of mail distribution facility, which is dictated by law.

Other design issues relating to the fad that the dormitory is to be a residential college were not consid- ered by this project; for example, the team had no input regarding classrooms and other academic and social facilities. However, two common area design CTQs that were addressed are shown in Table 17. The requirements here are clear and no further expla- nation is required.

The tlnal area to be addressed is the services that the dormitory will provide. Table 18 shows a list of service CTQs by design option.

Table 18 shows a distinct difference between the Undergraduate design and the other two designs, as the Undergraduate design does not require many services. However, this difference is not as significant as it might seem at first. The key factor here is that the marginal cost of providing many of the services demanded by the Graduate and Luxury designs approach zero.

The only two services not covered by the marginal cost problem are those dealing with the segregation of

Table 17 Common area requirements by design type

CTQ (feature or service)

Luxury Undergraduate Graduate suite

Laundry facility by floor

Reserved convenient parking place

Broadband internet x Additional phone x

services PC rental service X Shared common x

printer Appliance rental

service Enforced quiet areas Shared common x

vacuum cleaner Accessible roof x Security guard x Optional laundry x

service Optional maid x

service Concierge Admissions for

busines.s students only

Segregate residents by class level

Option to rent by semester

students by educational status {undergraduate, gradu- ate, and executive-in-residence). The Undergraduate design favors an open door policy, which is in strict opposition to the segregated views of the other two design types. Other stakeholders, including the Dean ofthe School of Business Administration, favor a segregated structure for the dormitory; conse- quently, the building will be segregated by educational status.

The final design derived from the three significant Pugh designs will contain the CTQs shown in Table 19.

Figure 2 shows what a residential floor would look like, given the constraints placed by the dimensions of the plot of land, and integration of common areas and other required items such as stairs, elevators, and trash disposal.

Estimating the Capabilities of the C T Q s in the Design

In this case, the CTQs are either present or absent, hence, it is impossible to have a process capability mea- sure for a CTQ., for example, a "television set" is either provided, or not provided.

Designing New Housing at the University of Miami 321

Table 19 Final design featiu-es

CTQ (feature or service) Reduced design

Single occupancy rooms Individual bathrooms Quccn-size bed Broadband internet Television unit Telephone unit Cordless telephone unit Additioiial phone services PC rental service Shared common printer Large corner desk Executive desk chair Additional desk chairs Climate control by room Full-size bathtub Microwave Small refrigerator Kitchenette Appliance rental service VCR DVD player Carpet Enforced quiet areas Sbared common vacuum cleaner Accessible roof Security guard Laundry facility by floor Optional laundry service Optional maid service Concierge Reserved convenient parking place Admissions for business students only Segregate residents by class level Armoire Option to rent by semester

Preparing a Verification Plan

The final step in the Design Phase is to set up a con- trol system to keep the new design from deteriorating under the force of entropy. This involves setting up control charts and other metrics to track the CTQs. However, as with the previous section., this part ofthe Verification Plan does not apply because this project is just a concept piece.

This step also includes a plan to ensure that this new design can be scaled up from the drawing board and become reaUty. The floor plans and three-dimensional renderings need to beeome prototypes for testing, and from there, to become the means for constructing a fully functional residential college building.

Figure 2. Floor plan.

VERIFY P H A S E

Introduction

The intent ofthe Verify Phase includes facilitating the buy-in of process owners, designing a control and transition plan, and concluding the DMADV project. The results of this DMADV project are highly concep- tual and it is not a substitute for the crafts and disciplines of engineers and architects. The result of this project is a starting point for the professionals that will now continue the process of building this dormitory.

Process Owner Buy-In

Process owners need to be involved to facilitate buy-in to the final design. In the dormitory example, the process owners were kept intimately involved in the project. Additionally, the results have been dis- cussed with appropriate stakeholders and 3-D models have been rendered and reviewed by the stakeholders. The Champion for the project has long-term working relationships with all stakeholders that create trust and energy regarding the work of the team, further facilitating process owner buy-in.

Transitional Controls

A summarized checklist of the findings of this pro- ject was developed in the Design Phase. This checklist

322 J.A. Johnson et al.

should act as a guide for the engineers and architects who will further develop llie project. All bids must include historical process capabilities of the bidding parties. These process capabilities may include:

• Defects per units constructed • Timeliness of deliveries • Timeliness of construction • Defects per units fabricated • Rework time per initial man hours invested • Fines per project ihat result from construction regu-

lation violations

All bids must include Gantt charts with budgets that can be contractually agreed upon.

Ongoing Controls

A preventive maintetianee system per manufac- turer recommendations must be implemented after construction. There must be a detailed flow chart for every preventive maintenance task. All regular mainte- nance must be extensively logged and conlrol charted by hours to provide essential details for determining special causes of variation in the future. Additionally, the number of hours may be reduced via the PDSA cycle. This will minimize the inconveniences experi- enced by the tenants due to property failures.

Occupancy indicator control charts must also be implemented. They include;

• Number of applications per semester • Percentage of rented rooins by semester • Number of students on a waiting list by semester • Time between meeting capacity and move-in date by

semester

The previotisly mentioned controls can be most effec- tively initiated with a dashboard dedicated to mana- ging the dormitory. The partial dashboard in Table 20 is well suited as a starting point.

The final part of the Verify Phase is to maintain communication between the champion and the process owner. These lines of communication will alleviate any confusion or other unforeseen problems that will inevi- tably develop. It will ensure that the conceptual design is not compromised by outside forces and entropy.

This concludes the project. This process will now be turned over to the process owner with control plans for future turns of the PDSA cycle and the team will now disband, celebrate their success, and take on other projects.

CONCLUSION

"Six Sigma" management is the relentless and rigor- ous pursuit of the reduction of variation in all critical processes in an organization. Its purpose is to achieve continuous and breakthrough improvements that impact the bottom line and increase customer satisfaction. The two methods employed in Six Sigma initiatives to achieve

Key objectives

Dormitory

Key

Partial

management

indicators

Table 20 dormitory management dashboard

Projects

Minimize TLCC

Minimize student inconveniences

Maximize reveunc

# of PM work order hours per month

# of non-PM work order hours per month

# of nights any tennet must be displaced due to dormitory issues (i.e., broken water lines, etc.)

# of common inconveniences documented per month (i.e., interiipl student to momentarily work on their A / C switch, etc.)

% of rented rooms by month # of students on waiting list Average time room is

imrentabic due lo repair between occupancies

Determine relationship on the TLCC with respect lo preventive maintenance work orders and optimize this relationshiop

Pareto diagram reasons for student inconveniences and then use Ihc PDSA cycle

Designing INew Housing at the Universiiy of Miami 323

this high standard of quality are called the DMAIC method and the DMADV method. The DMAIC method is used primarily for improvement of an existing product. service, or process, while the DMADV method is used primarily for the invention and innovation of modified or new products, services, or processes. This paper focused on the DMADV method.

The Define Phase of the DMADV model has five components: establish the background and business case; assess the ri.sks, benefits, and costs ofthe project; form the product development team; develop the pro- ject plan; and write the project charter. The Measure Phase has three steps: segment the market, design and conduct a Kano survey, and finally, use the Kano survey results as Quality Function Deployment inputs to find Critical to Quality Characteristics (CTQs). The Analyze Phase contains four steps; Design Generation, Design Analysis. Risk Analysis, and Design Model. The Design Phase has four steps: constructing a detailed design, converting CTQs into critical to Pro- cess elements (CTPs), estimating the capabilities of the CTPs in the design, and preparing a verification plan. CTPs are revised definitions of CTQs that are measurable using statistical methods. The intent of the Verify Phase includes facilitating the buy-in of process owners, designing a control and transition plan, and concluding the DMADV project. Each of the above phases was illustrated using a dormitory case study.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Adam Johnson graduated from Auburn University in December of 2000 with a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering. He received his Master of Business Administration at the University of Miami and is a Six Sigma Black Belt.

Scott Widener graduated from Iowa State Univer- sity in May of 2001, with a Bachelor of Science in Ceramic Engineering, and from the University of Miami in May of 2003 with a Master of Business Administration in Quality Management. He is a Six Sigma Black Belt.

Dr. Edward Popovich is Vice President of Process Excellence at Boca Raton Community Hospital. He has taught at the University of Florida, University of Central Florida, Florida Atlantic University, Nova Southeastern University, and has guest-lectured at several other universities.

Dr. Howard S. Gitlow is Executive Director of the Institute for the Study of Quality and a Professor of Management Science, University of Miami. Coral Gables, Florida. He is a Six Sigma Master Black Belt and a Fellow of the American Society for Quality.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to Jason Niggley for his contribu- tions in organizing and leading the discussions of the focus groups and his contributions to the content of this article.

REFERENCES

Altshuller. G. (1996). Ami Suddenly the Invenlor Appeared: Triz, the Theory of Invenlive Prohlem Solving. 2nd ed. Worschester, MA: Technical Innovation Center.

Center for Quality Management. (1993). A special issue on: Kanu 's Method.'^ for Understanding Cu.slomer-Defined Qualiiy. The Center for Quality Management Jourmil. (Cambridge, MA), 2(4):Fall.

De Bono, E. (1992). Serious Creativity: Using the Power of Lateral Thinking to Create New Ideas. New York: Harper Business.

Gitlow, H. (1998 1999). Innovation on Demand. Quality Engineering. l l ( l ) : 7 9 89.

Kano, N., Takahashi, F. (1979). The Motivator Hygiene Factor in Quality. JSQC, 9(th) Annual Presentation Meeting, Abstracts, pp. 21-26.

Pugh. S. (1991). Total De.sign: Integrated Methods for Suc- cessful Product Engineering, Addison-Wesley Pub Co. Boston. MA.

Rasis, D.. Gitlow, H., Popovich. E. (2002). Paper organizers international: a fictitious six sigma green belt case study- part 1. Quality Engineering. 15(1): 127-145.

Rasis. D.. Gitlow. H.. Popovich, E. (2002). Paper organizers international: a fictitious six sigma green belt case study-part 2. Quality Engineering. 15(2):259 274.