Solving Retail Problems

Using Lean Six Sigma

About Accenture Process &

Innovation Performance
The Accenture Process & Innovation
Performance service line takes an
end-to-end, process-based approach
to address key business challenges
such as complexity reduction, lean
manufacturing and operations, process
innovation, strategic cost reduction
and growth through innovation, in
order to create competitive advantage
for clients globally. We help our
clients become high-performance
businesses by enhancing the internal
capabilities needed to continuously
improve operational and innovation
performance. Accenture enhanced its
longstanding operations and strategy
expertise with the 2007 acquisition
of George Group, a recognized
market leader in process, operational
and business transformation, and
innovation strategy, whose capabilities
and offerings form the foundation of
this new service line.

The rise of Lean Six Sigma in

retail
Lean Six Sigma (LSS) is a continuous
improvement methodology that
combines two of the most powerful
improvement engines available
to business today. Lean provides
mechanisms for quickly and
dramatically slashing lead times and
waste in any process, anywhere in an
organization. Six Sigma provides the
tools and organizational guidelines
that establish a foundation for
sustained, data-based improvement
in strategically important, customercritical targets. Today, Lean Six Sigma
has grown beyond these problemsolving roots and now encompasses
high-level analytical tools and
deployment guidelines. These tools
and guidelines give executives the
means to establish and maintain
strategy-to-execution links in their
efforts to become high-performance
businesses.

Lean Six Sigma in retail

series
This series of three articles explores
how LSS deployments designed
specifically for retail can drive
operational excellence throughout a
company, from corporate offices to
individual stores, and help retailers
drive high performance. The series
provides retail-specific insights
gained in working with pioneering
retailers deploying LSS. The articles in
this series cover the following topics:
1. Applying Lean Six Sigma Principles
in Retail Stores: A discussion of the
specific challenges retail companies
face and case examples highlighting
what some retailers have done to
overcome these challenges in
applying LSS in stores.
2. Solving Retail Problems Using
Lean Six Sigma: A look into solving
simple to complex business problems
using LSS tools and approaches.

3. Leadership in Retail Lean Six Sigma

Deployments to Achieve High
Performance: An exploration into the
necessary leadership roles and
discussion of leadership support in
successful LSS deployments.

Summary of first article

In the first article in this series,
Applying Lean Six Sigma Principles in
Retail Stores, we discussed how the
robust problem-solving methodology of
Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has been
effectively adapted to many industries,
including retail, despite Lean Six
Sigmas start in traditional
manufacturing and services industries.
Proven by companies across industries,
the flexibility of LSS and the DMAIC
(define-measure-analyze-improvecontrol) methodology helps companies,
including retailers, adjust to specific
industry needs quite well.

Helps ensure change will be

sustainable through a control plan
by identifying: 1) The process; 2)
The critical process factors that
should be monitored; 3) Methods
to monitor them (for example, the
more visual the better); 4) Standard
state for the critical factors (in
other words, how they should
be performing to get the desired
process performance); and 5) The
response plan when the critical
factors in the process are not
performing to standard. Following
these steps allows corrections to be
made early in the process, before
the output misses targets.

Based on Accentures experience, we

believe LSS and DMAIC have achieved
strong results in retail for a number of
reasons. The use of LSS and DMAIC:
Enables retailers to better define
the problem. Retailers tend to
list numerous issues but lose the
focus on what measures are not
performing at the right level.
Oftentimes, companies cannot
express what output measures will
be different and/or quantify the
improvement in the output measure.
LSS also helps get to the process
behind the problem.
Maps and measures the process.
Retail companies tend to miss
the process aspects of everyday
work and therefore miss the nonvalue-add aspects of the process.
Mapping and measuring the process
highlights the non-value add (waste)
in the process.
Identifies critical process factors
that have the most influence on
key output measures. LSS forces
the team to identify the critical
factors in the process that drives the
performance of the output measure
by using data analysis to replace
experiential or reactionary methods.
Addressing these critical factors is
the best way to get step-change
performance that is sustainable.

Lean Six Sigma deployments designed specifically for the retail

industry hold the potential to drive high performance for
companies.
Lean Six Sigma (LSS) has long been
applied in other industries to drive
operational excellence. More recently,
the retail industry is discovering ways
to tailor this continuous improvement
methodology to the industrys unique
challenges to solve problems, execute
methodical changes and make
process-change decisions. By
addressing the unique challenges of
the industry as well as of store
environments, LSS can drive high
performance in retail as it has in other
industries. Increasingly, retailers are
applying LSS using a variety of tools to
address problems with a wide range of
scope, complexity and impact. From
Kaizens to accelerated improvements
to enterprisewide Black Belt projects,
the LSS toolkit is large and diverse.
This article discusses various
approaches retailers can take to
effectively solve problems on their
journeys to high performance.
Few retailers would dispute the unique
nature and challenges of retailing.
With Lean Six Sigma, different

approaches drawing on a large toolkit

can be applied to solve a diverse array
of problems. If an issue affects all
stores in the United States, for
example, a solution may entail
executing a project at the corporate
level, but perhaps require
implementing another approach using
DMAIC (define-measure-analyzeimprove-control) methodology to
address local or district concerns. In
general, the use of LSS allows a
concurrent top-down, middle-out and
bottom-up approach to process
improvement, creating a synergy of
activities designed to satisfy
customers, stakeholders and associates.
Not only can LSS be applied to a wide
range of problems, it also is flexible.
The flexibility of LSS is demonstrated
in the various ways in which the
approaches can be used effectively in
solving problems. Factors such as
scope, available resources, time to
complete, and complexity can all
impact the overall project approach.
Along with the ability to lead and

influence a team, application of the

appropriate approach differentiates the
best LSS project leaders from the
average. From the basic to complex,
choice of LSS approaches is as much
an art as it is a science.
LSS projects use a disciplined approach
not only through the DMAIC process,
but also with strong project and
change management applications to
increase the probability of long-term
success. Even with the most carefully
crafted approaches and the best
project management, the success of
LSS projects also hinges on the people
factor, specifically the ability of team
members to unite. True problem
solving becomes attainable the
moment team members understand
that even the most diverse areas of the
business have similar issues and ways
of thinking. Although people are
creatures of habit, there are reasons
they continue to perform in the same
way. LSS approaches help bring
entrenched issues to the forefront

LSS DMAIC Methodology

DMAIC (pronounced d-may-ick) is the incremental process
improvement methodology of Lean Six Sigma. It is an acronym
that stands for five interconnected phases: Define, Measure,
Analyze, Improve and Control. Practitioners who use LSS follow
the DMAIC process strictly to ensure the improvements are
data-driven instead of led by conventional wisdom. The five
phases of the methodology are:
DefineWhat exactly is the problem? Identify and/or validate
the improvement opportunity.
MeasureWhat data do we have? Identify and collect critical
metrics/data to demonstrate and understand the problem.
AnalyzeWhat does the data tell us about how good (or bad)
we and the primary drivers of the process are? Identify and
validate that the true root causes are being addressed.
ImproveWhat does the data tell us are the best possible
solutions both from an impact standpoint as well as cost/
benefit? Identify, evaluate and select the right improvement
solutions.
ControlWhat do we put in place to ensure the problem stays
fixed? Establish process controls and metrics so we dont
have to solve the problem again next year.

where they can be resolved and

remove the we vs. they mentality.
Removing this mentality is required for
fundamental process improvement.
Both change management techniques
and data analysis are powerful sets of
tools that help build this necessary
alignment of team members. During
any project, project leaders must
collect and use data appropriately to
remove the possibility of decisions
based on emotion or experiential
anecdotes. In one case, accepted
conventional wisdom drove different
goals for each distribution center
because the mix of product was
different between centers. Over time,
the centers met or slightly exceeded
the established goals. During a Black
Belt project, test runs and data
analysis proved that despite the variety
of products, all of the centers should
perform similarlyand, in fact, at a
higher rate than any of the centers
were currently expected to perform.
The vice president over the distribution
centers raised the goals to the new
rates and within six months every
distribution center consistently met
the new goals.
With the many challenges in the retail
environment, use of basic project
management approaches to gain
buy-in and consensus are also critical
to project success in all projects,
whether simple or complex. When the
problem scope is straightforward and
the risk of implementation is low,
some basic approaches tend to be used
successfully and quickly. Nevertheless,
a question that often arises is: why
does a simple project using a basic
approach take three months to
complete? The answer is: it does not,
and probably should not, have to take
three months with the appropriate LSS
approach. The project duration is
usually driven by the scope,
complexity, project leaders experience
and leadership, the strength of the LSS
knowledge and the leadership support
on the project.

LSS approaches to simple

problems
Depending on scope, implementation
risk and degree of complexity, some
projects can be completed using an
accelerated improvement approach.
Accelerated improvement is often used
within projects to drive faster
completion of a particular phase or
component (an example: value stream
mapping). However, used properly,
accelerated improvement can be used
effectively to execute projects. The
technique is straightforward, but
requires strong facilitation skills and
DMAIC knowledge, intense preparation
and follow-up management.
Characteristics of an accelerated
improvement approach:
A core team of six to eight crossfunctional representatives prepares
the logistics, designs the agenda
and determines the participants
and pathway for the event. An
accelerated improvementI event can
work effectively with as many as 35
participants.
The pathway consists of a series
of questions designed to drive the
group to quick understanding of
the problem, leading to solution
generation.
Questions are answered by small
breakout groups, and each group
reports back its best answers to
the overall team. The overall team
then discusses each answer and
determines the best next steps.
Typically, solutions are not
implemented during an accelerated
improvement event; therefore,
developing detailed follow-up action
items with due dates and identifying
ownership is imperative to success.
The event is considered complete
upon full implementation of the
follow-up list and sign-off of the
control plan.
The accelerated improvement approach
is very effective when used
appropriately, but it is not always
adequate. More complex projects
require statistical analysis in addition
to the basic tools to identify and solve
the root cause or causes of problems.

As project complexity and scope

increases, the accelerated improvement
approach no longer becomes
functional or effective. When project
scope exceeds the accelerated
improvement approach, but is still
fairly narrow, a Kaizen is often the
answer. Kaizen is often called
accelerated DMAIC or DMAIC in a
week. To be more precise, the event
lasts for a week, but is preceded by one
to two preparation weeks and followed
by a 20-day follow-up period. The
primary differences between
accelerated improvement and Kaizen
are scope, team size (accelerated
improvement can have up to 35
members compared to six to eight in a
Kaizen) and speed of implementation
(accelerated improvement develops a
future plan while a Kaizen takes
immediate action).
Characteristics of a Kaizen process:
Kaizen events consist of three steps:
planning, the event and follow-up.
The one- to two-week planning
phase requires a Kaizen leader not
only to select the team and plan
the necessary logistics, but to also
complete the define phase and
collect initial data for the event.
The Kaizen event itself, which is
typically five days in duration,
completes the measure, analyze
and improve phases of the DMAIC
methodology. During the event,
additional data is collected and
analyzed, potential solutions are
brainstormed and prioritized, and
implementation of the best solutions
is begun.
As in all LSS work, a control plan
is required. The plan is developed
in the event along with a follow-up
action plan for the solutions that
were not completed during the
week, and appropriate sign-off
is obtained.

Accelerated improvement: Weekly insert process

A large US retailer determined the advertising portion of the
weekly insert took 14 work days to create. The defect rate with
its current process exceeded 90 percent resulting in extensive
rework. Although the retailer never missed an insert, the
process to meet printer deadlines was costly.
After determining that more than 30 hand-offs were involved
in the process of creating the insert, the Accenture team
determined that the accelerated improvement approach was
the most appropriate to help resolve the issues. Three major
planning activities were necessary: determining the necessary
team members, socializing the process and creating the agenda
for the event itself. During the 12-hour session, 40 crossfunctional team members determined the as-is value stream
map, the root causes of the process delays, the future state, and
the steps and ownership needed to implement the improvement
changes.
The team implemented multiple solutions with the most
important being a distinct timeline for each step in creating
the insert, based on hard deadlines. The solutions were piloted
in one class of product, and then implemented throughout the
organization over the next few months. Once completed, the
cycle time from the first touch by advertising was reduced to
four days, and the defect rate decreased to less than 5 percent.

Kaizen: In-store cost reduction

A new store upgrade for high-scale products was implemented
in a faster-than-normal pace in order to be first to market. After
the project was complete, the team reviewed the new process
and determined cost overruns of more than $500,000 per store
were controllable.
After determining the appropriate cross-functional team,
the Kaizen team reviewed the construction process and each
component of the new store design using LSS tools and the
Kaizen focus on action. The construction process was reduced
by two weeks by reducing process inefficiencies and timelines
and improving communication between functions. Using voiceof-customer data from existing store upgrades, the team was
also able to identify and eliminate wasteful pieces of the design
that were not valued by customers. An example of this waste
reduction was the elimination of wood paneling in the storage
area (the initial plan created matching wood paneling for all
areas of the display).
Over the course of the week, the team discovered more than 30
unnecessary components of the original design. They created a
new construction process and timeline resulting in more than
$5 million in annual savings and increased margin from earlier
store upgrade openings. Through this project, Accenture helped
demonstrate how LSS can help drive high performance.
6

LSS approaches to complex

problems
A combination of accelerated
improvement and Kaizen often prove
to be quite effective in solving a
number of problems. So why not use
them to solve every problem? The
answer is that these methods should
be used when practical, particularly in
stores because of the relative short
time requirements for team members.
However, not every problem fits the
faster methods of accelerated
improvement and Kaizen and instead
requires Green Belt- or Black Belt-level
analysis to solve.
When the scope, complexity and/or
difficulty of obtaining buy-in from key
stakeholders increases, accelerated
improvement and Kaizen methods are
not as effective. In most LSS
deployments, the primary vehicle for
problem solving is Green Belt and
Black Belt project approaches. Projects
at these levels use DMAIC in a
methodical, analytical approach to
determine the best possible solution or
solutions. Where accelerated
improvement and Kaizen use some
data to help drive solutions, the
necessary discipline is less than typical
Green Belt or Black Belt projects. The
quick improvements identified in
Kaizens are intended for action and
typically based on directional data or
tribal knowledge, targeting 80
percent confidence. Green Belt and
Black Belt projects require more
detailed analysis and target decisions
with a much more stringent confidence
level of 95 percent.

Belts are most effective when the role

is a full-time process improvement
position in the organization. They
receive four or five weeks of deep
DMAIC theory and application training,
and can lead large, complex, crossfunctional projects with coaching from
more experienced, certified Master
Black Belts. The Green Belt typically
gets two weeks of training that
provides enough knowledge to
complete focused, single functional
projects with coaching support from
either a Master Black Belt or a Black
Belt.
Retail executives often ask how Green
Belt/Black Belt projects in stores can
be completed when they require
resources for three to eight months to
finish. Gaining traction in stores is
difficult with the traditional approach
to LSS projects due to not only tight
labor constraints, which does not allow
associates time away to work on
long-term improvement efforts, but
also turnover at the store level that
makes a sustainable team difficult to
design. One solution is the project
accelerator (PA), a new model for
DMAIC projects. Project accelerator is
an intensive one-to-two-day event
designed to complete an entire phase
of DMAIC or to complete a complex
task (such as value stream mapping). A
complex LSS project in the store can
be completed in the original or possibly
shorter timeline by a combination of
project accelerator and research/
planning.
Characteristics of the project
accelerator method:

Green Belt and Black Belt projects are

the necessary approach for more
complex and higher risk problems. The
project timelines vary tremendously
due to scope, experience level,
leadership support, data availability
and other reasons, but a typical
expectation is three to six months for
Black Belt projects and two to four
months for Green Belt projects.

Project leader, either Green Belt

or Black Belt, plans the event and
creates the agenda.

The primary differences between Green

Belt and Black Belt project leaders are
the level of training, depth of
knowledge and scope of projects. Black

The project leader is responsible for

completing the follow-up plan prior
to the next event or phase.

The scope of the event is determined

based on DMAIC phase, need and
team dynamic after discussion with
the project sponsor.
During the event, decisions are
made and a follow-up plan is
implemented.

A DMAIC project could be completed

by a series of project accelerator
events depending on the scope of
the project.
As an example of how the project
accelerator method can be used, a
define/measure project accelerator was
conducted in a retailers copy print
center where some team members
were located in the corporate office
and others were scattered among
multiple stores. In the project
accelerator event, the following were
completed: the team launch, voice of
the customer, communication plan,
value stream mapping (VSM),
perational definitions and data
collection plan.
Also, the project charter, SIPOC
diagram and project timeline were
nearly complete in the project
accelerator (see also sidebar on LSS
Tools Primer). At the end of the
project accelerator, the project leader
was nearly ready for the define and
measure tollgates. Tollgates are formal
reviews between the DMAIC team and
the project sponsor and champion.
Held at the end of each phase,
tollgates have three major functions:
1) presentation of the methodology
and learnings from the just-completed
phase; 2) a go/no-go decision from the
sponsor and champion to pass the
tollgate and continue the project to
the next phase; and 3) a full discussion
on next steps in the project.

Green Belt and Black Belt projects

Reduction of misdelivery errors
A large US retailer incorrectly loaded
more than 20,000 boxes of customer
orders per year, placing boxes on
the wrong delivery trucks. These
errors resulted in increased labor
and transportation costs to redeliver
boxes to customers as well as reduced
customer satisfaction. The retailers
project team addressed this problem,
beginning with a single distribution
center in their network. Using basic
LSS tools such as value stream maps
and value-add analysis to analyze
the issue, the team determined that
repetitive route changes, lack of visual
tools and an inefficient label-delivery
process were driving these delivery
errors. The project team identified
and implemented several solutions
including making permanent route
moves, installing large white boards
with planning data and relocating
the label printing. These relatively
simple and low-risk solutions resulted
in $30,000 of cost savings for the
distribution center with the potential
for $200,000 of benefits upon
replication across the other centers and
a 65 percent reduction in errors.

Improved freight consolidation

By missing opportunities to consolidate
freight transported from their suppliers
to several distribution centers, a large
global retailer incurred higher-thannecessary freight expenses. A freight
optimization process was executed
twice each business day; however, the
consolidation of additional supplier
shipments was estimated to potentially
reduce annual inbound freight costs
by more than $750,000. The project
team used histograms and process
complexity identification tools to
uncover three main root causes
that resulted in inefficient freight
optimization: 1) suppliers were required
to request routing instructions at
least 48 hours in advance of their ship
date; 2) suppliers were given instant

routing responses unnecessarily; and 3)

current allocation of resources did not
provide freight optimization process
support. These causes reduced the time
available and shipment visibility for the
retailer to analyze opportunities and
consolidate freight.
Enlisting the expertise of crossfunctional associates, the team
generated a large list of solutions and
identified two primary solutions for
implementation that were chosen using
a cause-and-effect diagram (also know
as a fishbone diagram). By removing
suppliers ability for instant routing
and reallocating internal resources to
freight optimization, the team was able
to eliminate four critical controllable
defects and generate $752,000 in
annualized savings.

Reduction of damage inventory

The damaged inventory levels in a
leading global retailers US stores
averaged around $11.5 million, tying
up costly working capital and slowing
down replenishment of necessary
product inventory in stores. In the
early analysis of the data, the Black
Belt discovered that 30 percent of
the return reason codes entered were
incorrect. This discovery highlighted
a problem much greater than initially
expected: the actual damaged
inventory was 23 percent higher than
the recorded financial reports, the
cycle time to process and clear some
damaged inventory exceeded a year,
and significant complexity was added
to the store inventory positions.

then analyzed and tested data that

actually proved conclusions directly
opposite of supposed widely accepted
truths.
The Black Belt leveraged a crossfunctional team of corporate and store
inventory associates to redistribute
workload and accountability between
the store inventory and service desk
associates to increase inventory
accuracy. Also, the complexity of the
damaged inventory processing was
reduced by balancing process loads
balancing, allowing the inventory
associates to control damage-onhand inventory and process damaged
inventory a minimum of three times
per week. This change enabled the
inventory process to be executed more
often and reduced the cycle time of
processing damaged inventory. As a
result, the running average of damaged
inventory was reduced by 26 percent
or $3.5 million, resulting in capital
improvement of $409,000 and a turn
improvement of 2.25bp. Additionally,
the cycle time of items in the damaged
inventory was reduced by 37 percent to
less than 10 days.

Analyzing the drivers of inventory using

deep LSS tools such as Lean value
stream mapping, process balancing
and advanced ANOVA statistical
analysis, the team uncovered several
critical root causes: 1) multiple process
failure points were uncovered before
the damaged product inventory was
placed in the cage; 2) cashiers were
not trained on returns and exchanges;
and 3) an audit process did not exist
for damaged product reports. The team

Progressing to high
performance through
operational transformation
Understanding the variety of
approaches for different business
issues and how they can be applied
increases the effectiveness of the
project solutions and program growth,
ultimately contributing to achieving
high performance. LSS can be and is
successful in the retail industry
because its robust and flexible nature
fits into the fast-paced, variable
competitive environment and
organizational cultures. Moreover, in
retail, flexibility and diversity are
requirements for any sustainable
cultural change agent.
Whether a project is a complex,
cross-functional enterprisewide effort
or a local improvement
implementation, the LSS toolkit

applies. Determining which option or

set of options to use is the art of the
process. Each companys project
selection process should include a
determination of the best methodology
and approach to successful completion.
LSS and its ability to match the needs
of the business is a strong solution for
operational transformation and
cultural change.

Third article in series

In the final article in this series of
achieving high performance through
Lean Six Sigma in retail, we discuss the
importance of leadership and explore
the necessary key leadership roles in
successful LSS deployments.
To learn more, please go to
www.accenture.com/
processandinnovationperformance.

Criteria
Approach
Project
Accelerator
(PA)
Accelerated
Improvement
(AI)
Kaizen

Green Belt
(GB)

Black Belt
(BB)

Description
short, intensive event
designed to complete an
entire phase of DMAIC or to
complete a complex task
Short burst of activity
concerning a specific issue
to determine an agreed upon
set of actions
Intense event utilizing
DMAIC methodology in
which root causes and
solutions of smaller scoped
issues are determined, and
solutions are implemented
immediately
Focused projects within a
functional area utilizing
DMAIC methodology to
solve smaller problems
Project utilizing DMAIC
methodology to solve root
causes to major issues and
establish permanent controls

Complexity
Extremely low

Scope
Small

Implementation
Risk
Low

Low

Small

Low

1-2 days with

variable follow-up

Low to moderate

Small to
medium

Low to moderate

4-5 days with 15-30

days follow-up

Low to moderate

Medium

Moderate

2-4 months

High

Large

Moderate to high

3-6 months

Typical Timeframe
1-2 days

Lean Six Sigma Tools Primer

Basic tools
Affinity Diagram: An approach for
organizing facts, opinions and issues
into natural groups as an aid to
diagnosing a complex problem.
Cause-and-Effect Diagram (also
known as a Fishbone or Ishikawa
Diagram) and 5 Whys: Strong
brainstorming approach to determine
the relationship between a problem
symptom and its main causes and subcauses.
Force-field Analysis: An approach to
assist in examining the factors that
will aid (called driving forces) or hinder
(called restraining forces) in reaching
an objective. Also, aids in helping
understand the forces that keep things
the way they are.
Histogram: A basic graph that displays
relative frequency or occurrence
of data values and enables easier
observation of patterns in a set of
data as compared to a simple table of
numbers.
Nominal Group Technique (NGT): A
structured approach that supplements
brainstorming, used to generate
additional ideas, survey the opinions
of a small group and prioritize
brainstormed ideas, issues or solutions.
Pareto Chart: A type of bar chart that
helps quantify and prioritize problems
so effort is focused on the vital few
causes as opposed to the trivial many.
The Pareto principle suggests that 80
percent of the effect of the problem is
attributed to 20 percent of the causes.
Process Map: Visual representation of
the steps of work path used to produce
a product or perform a function to
better understand processes, comprises
a stream of activities that transforms
defined inputs into a set of outputs.
SIPOC (which stands for suppliers,
inputs, process, output and
customers): A high-level process
chart that primarily helps identify the
process output(s) and the customers of
the output.

Stakeholder Analysis: A visual tool

used to help identify key stakeholders
level of support in order to develop an
action plan and enlist support for a
project or change.
Value Stream Mapping (VSM):
Process mapping technique that helps
identify and understand the flow of
material and information as a product
or service makes its way through the
process work path.

More advanced tools

ANOVA: Statistical models to estimate
the variance components associated
with total amount of observed
variation, assists in identifying the
critical causes of a problem.
Boxplot (also called box-and-whisker
diagrams): A graph used to visualize
both the median and the range of a
process and allow for easy graphical
comparison of multiple sets of data.
Control Chart: A graphical approach
for monitoring changes within a
process, distinguishes variation that
is inherent in the process (common
cause) from variation that indicates a
change to the process (special cause).
Design of Experiment (DOE): A
structured, organized method for
planning, conducting and interpreting
controlled tests to determine the
relationship between factors affecting
the outputs of a process.
Process Capability: A statistical
measure of the inherent process
variability for a given characteristic
and refers to the ability of a process
to produce a defect-free product or
service.
Regression Analysis: A statistical
method to describe and quantify the
relationship between two or more
variables.
Trend Analysis: An approach to chart
and analyze data to identify underlying
long-term trends (e.g., failure patterns).

10

About Accenture

Contact us

Accenture is a global management

consulting, technology services
and outsourcing company.
Combining unparalleled experience,
comprehensive capabilities across all
industries and business functions,
and extensive research on the worlds
most successful companies, Accenture
collaborates with clients to help them
become high-performance businesses
and governments. With more than
186,000 people in 49 countries, the
company generated net revenues of
US$23.39 billion for the fiscal year
ended Aug. 31, 2008. Its home page
is www.accenture.com.

To learn more, see our thought

leadership on www.accenture.com/
processandinnovationperformance
or call one of our senior directors:

Copyright 2008 Accenture

All rights reserved.
Accenture, its logo, and
High Performance Delivered
are trademarks of Accenture.

Tony Curtis
+1 804 683 8914 or
anthony.e.curtis@accenture.com
Jin An
+1 804 387 8555 or
jin.m.an@accenture.com
Robert Gettys
+1 404 312 1762 or
george.gettys@accenture.com