1. Cookie MonStar Cookie Company:
Lean Six Sigma Process Improvement
Alex Rodriguez
Brandon McKinnie
Ezekiel Jones
Johnny Eaves
Leonard Burch
Malyka Austin

2. Define Phase

3. Define Phase—Executive Summary
 Cookie MonStar Cookie Company recently invested in a second facility that has
state of the art equipment and value-added technological advancements.
 Since beginning production, operations has noticed a reduction in customer
complaints with the newer facility; however, the older facility has seen an increase
in customer complaints and decrease in profits.
 The older facility produces fewer units than the new facility but incurs higher labor
cost. CMC will invest in equipment upgrades for the older facility and mandate
Quality Control training programs for all employees. The new changes will ensure
the older facility maintains the same production of output seen capable at the
newer facility, while developing a more effective work force.
 After changes have been implemented, operations feels that we can reduce
customer complaints in the old facility by 50% and increase profits by 15%. Cookie
MonStar is dedicated to improving the company’s brand image while improving
product quality, business integrity and credibility from every customer.

4. 4
Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter
Problem: CMCC will invest in equipment upgrades for the older facility and
mandate Quality Control training programs for all employees. The new
changes will ensure the older facility maintains the same product output
seen capable at the newer facility, all while developing a more effective
work force.
Scope: Implementation of Quality Control training and investing in equipment
upgrades for the older facility will greatly reduce customer complaints and
increase lagging sales revenue. The newer facility is out of scope.
Goal: The CMCC will reduce complaints at the old facility by 50%, resulting in a
revenue increase of $26,000 by the end of December, 2015.
Problem/Goal Statement
Tollgate Review Schedule
Business Impact
CMCC Team Members
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015
Measure: 6/18/2015
Analyze:
Improve:
Control:
Business Case: Cookie MonStar Cookie Company needs to focus more of its attention on
quality control. With this as a primary focus, this will alleviate a great deal of
customer complaints. Training our employees on our high expectations promotes a
natural check and balance equation among departments. We aim to provide quality
products to our customers. Focusing on quality will catapult the company’s brand into
excellence. Investing in new equipment and specialized standard training will rectify
our issues within the older facility.
Financial Impact: Upgrading equipment will reap a substantial impact on our finances;
however, improvement is necessary. We do not want to wait too late to try and salvage
our credibility. One of our goals is to increase sales by 15% (an additional $26,000
annually) which will alleviate some of the financial strains of purchasing/ leasing new
equipment.
Operational Impact: With the usage of new equipment and the training of employees on the
importance of quality control at the old facility, we will make a substantial impact on
our operational capabilities. The overall goal is to decrease customer complaints by
50%.
TeamMembers Position DefinePhaseDeliverables
MalykaAustin ProjectCoordinator DevelopCharter&CompilePowerPoint
JohnnyEaves Sr.ProjectSpecialist SIPOC/HighLevelProcessMap
BrandonMcKinnie Sr.ProjectSpecialist StakeholderCommunicationPlan
LeonardBurch ProjectManager GanttChart
EzekielJones Project Coordinator VOC
AlexRodriguez ProjectCoordinator CTQTree

5. Sales and Complaint Data
RowLabels Sumof Complaints Sumof Sales Sumof Profit/Unit Sumof Cost Sumof Cost/Unit Sumof Productivity(Unit/LaborHr) Sumof LaborHours Sumof UnitsProduced Sumof Margin
NewFacility 5540 $7,846,798.00 356.2110204 2617667.562 178.34 25806.99383 39261.88854 3846867.68 174.5631
OldFacility 11672 $7,800,393.00 342.2709524 2808805.129 192.86 23958.36373 42162.16988 3819987.22 167.5362
GrandTotal 17212 $15,647,191.00 698.4819728 5426472.69 371.2 49765.35756 81424.05843 7666854.9 342.0993
$26,000
$27,000
$28,000
$29,000
$30,000
$31,000
$32,000
01-Oct-14
15-Oct-14
29-Oct-14
12-Nov-14
26-Nov-14
10-Dec-14
24-Dec-14
07-Jan-15
21-Jan-15
04-Feb-15
18-Feb-15
04-Mar-15
18-Mar-15
Sales
Date
Old Facility
New Facility
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
01-Oct-14
15-Oct-14
29-Oct-14
12-Nov-14
26-Nov-14
10-Dec-14
24-Dec-14
07-Jan-15
21-Jan-15
04-Feb-15
18-Feb-15
04-Mar-15
18-Mar-15
NumberofComplaints
Date
Old Facility
New Facility

6. Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customer
Viking
Henry Farms
Cargill Foods
Maintenance
Duke Power
Alibaba Foods
Finance
Oven
Eggs, Butter, Milk
Sugar, Flavoring, Flour
Preventive maintenance
Gas
Chips, Nuts
Labor
Select ingredients
Mix ingredients
Bake ingredients
Remove cookies from oven
Package cookies
Ship cookies
Dough
Cookies
Quality Control
Warehouse
Retailer
Quality Control
Warehouse
Retailer
Ingredient quality
Ingredient quantity
Heating element
Thermostat
Conveyor system
Taste, Texture, Color
Quality
Information from plant
Dock to stock
Employee training
Equipment uptime
Information systems
Picks per hour
Carrier cut time
Speed
Information from WH
Tag cookies with price
Dock to store shelves
Information systems
Employee training and efficiency
Labor efficiency
Cost
Customer Input Metrics Process Metrics Output Metrics
SIPOC

7. VOC Ranking Matrix
Customer Requirements / Prioritization Tool
Date: 15-Jun-15
Customers▼
QualityControl
Warehouse
Retailer
Ranki
ng ►
10 10 7
Customer Requirements ▼ Rank % Rank
Quality 10 4 4 168 14.7%
Taste 10 1 4 138 12.1%
On-Time Delivery 1 7 10 150 13.2%
Packaging 10 4 4 168 14.7%
Order Replenishment 1 10 10 180 15.8%
Accessibility 1 1 10 90 7.9%
Size 7 4 4 138 12.1%
Quantity 4 4 4 108 9.5%

8. Stakeholder Communication Plan
Reasons to use Stakeholder Communication Plan:
1. Old plant product complaint 47% higher than new plant.
2. Old plant uses 2900.27 more labor hours than new plant to produce 27,880 less units than new plant.
3. Need to indentify stake holders to pin point root cause of problem in old plant.

10. Gantt Chart
6/1/2015 6/11/2015 6/21/2015 7/1/2015 7/11/2015 7/21/2015 7/31/2015
Begin Define Phase
SIPOC/ High Level Process Map
Stakeholder Communication Plan
Draft Report Due
Final Report Due
Detailed Process Map
Fishbone Diagram
Control Charts
Udated Project Status Report
NVA for Analyze Phase
Cause and Effect Matrix
FMEA
Updated Project Status Report
Pugh Matrix
Grahpical Analysis/ Improvements
Final Report Due
Begin Control Phase
Implementation Plan Template
Final Report Due
Presentation
Cookie Monstars Campaign Project Timeline
Days Complete Days Behind Days Ahead Days Future Today

11. Measure Phase

12. 12
Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter
• The Detailed Process Map was created to assist team in understanding the
overall process steps in detail, also the inputs and outputs required.
• Baking Temperature & Time data shows within USL/ LSL at the old facility;
therefore not cause of cookie hardness.
• Cookie Weight data shows within USL/LSL at the old facility; therefore not
contributing to cookie hardness.
• Taste parameters fall below LSL at the old facility.
• Implementation of quality control checks contribute to the reduction of
complaints.
Key Findings in Measure Phase
Tollgate Review Schedule
Graph
CMCC Team Members
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015
Measure: 6/18/2015 - 6/26/2015
Analyze: 6/28/2015
Improve:
Control:
Team Members Position Measure Phase Deliverables
Johnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist Detailed Process Map
Ezekiel Jones Project Coordinator X/Y Matrix
Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator Data Collection Table
Brandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist Control Chart
Malyka Austin Project Coordinator Updated Charter, PP Compilation
Leonard Burch Project Manager
Non Value Add Analysis, Project Plan/
Schedule

13. Detailed Map Chart

14. Cookie MonStars Non-Value Added Analysis
Value Stream Map

16. Data Collection Plan Table

17. • 11/26/2014 Taste Parameters Fall
Below LSL
• Hardness Parameters Moved
Outside USL/LSL 10/22/2014
• Approximately 30 Days Between
Hardness Parameter Fluctuation
and Taste Parameters Below LSL
• Hardness Parameters Outside
USL/LSL Cause Taste to Fall Below
LSL
• Hardness Parameters Outside
USL/LSL and Taste Parameters
Below LSL Increase Customer
Complaints
UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE TASTE OLD FACILITY

18. • Baking Temperatures Within
USL/LSL
• Baking Temperatures Not Cause of
Cookie Hardness
UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
CONTROL CHART MEASURING BAKING TEMP. OLD FACILITY

19. • Baking Times Within USL/LSL
• Baking Times Not Cause of Cookie
Hardness UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
CONTROL CHART MEASURING BAKE TIME OLD FACILITY

20. • Weight Within USL/LSL
• Cookie Weight Not Cause of Cookie
Hardness UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE WEIGHT OLD FACILITY

21. • 10/22/2014 Parameters Move
Outside of USL/LSL
• Hardness Parameters Outside USL-
LSL Increase Customer Complaints
USL
LSL
CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE HARDNESS OLD FACILITY

22. Analyze Phase

23. TeamMembers Position MeasurePhaseDeliverables
JohnnyEaves Sr.ProjectSpecialist Charter
EzekielJones Project Coordinator FMEA
AlexRodriguez ProjectCoordinator FishboneDiagram
BrandonMcKinnie Sr.ProjectSpecialist FTEST
MalykaAustin ProjectCoordinator BoxPlotofStatisticalTool(F-Test)
LeonardBurch ProjectManager FMEA
CMCC Team Members
Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter
Tollgate Review Schedule
STATISTICAL DATAKey Findings in Analyze Phase
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015
Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015
Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015
Improve:
Control:
Original (No
Change)
Test Data (with
Improvement Idea)
Mean 51.07380952 50.186
Variance 45.38977802 7.927625263
Observations 20 20
df 19 19
F 5.725520129
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.000191364
F Critical one-tail 2.168251601
Cookie Hardness Before and After Improvement
Implementation F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
• Determine and eliminate potential root causes of variation
• Quantify the impact of the root cause
• 82.5% Higher variance in cookie hardness baked with new
vendor’s flour

24. FMEA
Process Step Failure Mode Failure Effects Causes Controls
usemax
SEV Action Resp Timing
May be process step,
generalactivity, functional
area, or other rational
grouping
What is the potentialfailure or
undesirable outcome for this
area?
If the failure mode occurs,
what willthe effect be?
S
E
V
What is/are the cause/s of the
failure?
O
C
C
What controls are in place to prevent
the cause fromoccuring or to detect
that the cause has occurred?
D
E
T
R
P
N
What specific actions are required to improve
the RPNnumber
Who willbe accountable for
implementing the change
When is completion of the
action required or planned
Test Ingredients for
Quality
The ingredients doesn’t
meet standards.
The cookies will not pass
quality control. The
cookies will be of
dissatisfaction to the
consumer
9 Low-quality suppliers 9
Supplier scorecards and overall
supplier management
3 243
Implement quality metrics for the
suppliers that will increase quality
standards
The quality control
department and plant
management
3 months 5 4 1 20
Load the ingredients
into the mixer and mix
Ingredients aren't mixed
properly
Cookie taste is subpar. 10
Improperly trained
employees
8 Additional training time 5 400
Employee training hours is increased
by 3 hours per employee
Plant management and
human resources.
4 months 6 5 2 60
Load dough into hopper
Improperly loading dough
into the hopper
Cookie size variance 8
Improperly trained
employees
8 Additional training time 4 256
Employee training hours is increased
by 3 hours per employee
Plant management and
human resources.
4 months 5 5 2 50
Set oven temperature
and conveyor speed
Wrong temperature is set
Cookie hardness levels
will either be too hard or
soft.
10
Incorrect temperature
standards.
7
Proper temperature used
consistently for each cookie
batch and cookie sample
tasting.
1 70
Temperature trial runs to ensure
proper emperature for cookie baking
Plant management and
quality conrol
3 months 5 2 1 10
Start the Production
Line
Production line fails to
start or isn’t started
promptly
Production Flow Stalls
and Ingredients Age
10 Human and Machine Error 3
Human Production Line Trigger
and Computer Time Sensors
2 60
Production line test are run every
morning during normal operations
Process Manager and
Line Manager
Daily 8 2 1 16
Transport Cookies to
Cooling Chambers
Cookies are not
transoported by specified
time
Cookie composition is
changed ( harder or
softer)
8 Human Error 3
Cookies have to reach cooling
chambers by a certain time
within a certain temperature
range
1 24
Clear path for cookies to reach cooling
chambers, also having themometers in
each batch
Quality control manager 1 month 4 1 1 4
Test Cookies for Taste,
Texture and Hardness
Cookies will not meet
composition standards
Cookies will not pass
quality control and will
not sell well
9
Cookie production
process isn't functioning
correctly
4
Cookie hardness scale and
Quality control testing
3 108
Quality at the source will be
implemented
Quality control
management
3 months 5 2 2 20
Cookie Packaging
Packaging quality is
insufficient
Cookie packages break
and cookies go bad
10
Packaging glue and
material
5
Packaging stress testing is
performed
4 200
Order and maintian better quality,
price efficient glue and materials
Qualitity control over
packaging
2 months 6 3 2 36
P
S
E
V
P
O
C
C
P
D
E
T
P
R
P
N

25. X/Y Matrix

26. Statistical Tool: Two-Sample for Variances F-Test
• Tested 20 samples baked with old
vendor’s flour
• Tested 20 samples baked with new
vendor’s flour
• 82.5% Higher variance in cookie
hardness baked with new vendor’s
flour
• Conclusion new vendor’s flour cause
of increased variance in cookie
hardness
Original (No
Change)
Test Data (with
Improvement Idea)
Mean 51.07380952 50.186
Variance 45.38977802 7.927625263
Observations 20 20
df 19 19
F 5.725520129
P(F<=f) one-tail 0.000191364
F Critical one-tail 2.168251601
Cookie Hardness Before and After Improvement
Implementation F-Test Two-Sample for Variances
Current
Process
Test Data
(with
Improvement
Idea)
57.71 51.92
39.90 48.00
50.00 50.96
40.10 53.00
39.90 48.00
42.57 54.80
50.00 46.32
57.43 53.68
55.05 48.16
55.05 53.52
47.52 50.92
52.43 45.40
50.00 48.24
59.71 48.24
47.62 47.36
62.14 47.48
47.57 50.88
57.14 50.88
54.86 54.20
54.76 51.76
Cookies 1 (Hardness
Target 50 +/- 5)

27. Box Plot for Variance Test
(New Flour Vendor)
Statistic
Current
Process
Test Process
(Old Vendor)
q1 47.56 48
Min 39.90 45.4
median 51.21 50.88
max 62.14 54.8
q3 55.57 52.19

29. Improve Phase

30. CMCC Team Members
Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter
Tollgate Review Schedule
STATISTICAL DATAKey Findings in Improvement Phase
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015
Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015
Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015
Improve: 7/11/2015 7/18/2015
Control:
• Identified that the NEW vendor’s flour was not sifted to
cookie recipe specifications.
• Made decision to go with the older flour vendor.
• Financially, this vendor is more expensive but they
produce a quality product.
• Made equipment improvements in the older facility.
• Taste & hardness parameters returned to satisfactory
levels.
Team Members Position
Improvement Phase
Deliverables
Alex Rodriguez Project Coordinator Pilot Improved Process
Brandon McKinnie Sr. Project Specialist
Graphical Analysis
(Hardness/ Taste)
Ezekiel Jones Project Coordinator Quick Wins
Johnny Eaves Sr. Project Specialist Future State Process Map
Leonard Burch Project Manager Pugh Matrix
Malyka Austin Project Coordinator
Charter & Project Benefit
Worksheet

31. Pugh Matrix
Criteria
Continueusingnew
flowervendorasis
Returntooldflowervendor
Useoldvendoruntilnew
vendorfixesissues
Negotiatenew
priceanduseonlyoldvendor
Concept6
ImportanceRating
Cookie Quality - + + + 6
Cookie Taste - + + + 6
Sales Improvement - + + + 6 Better +
Sustainabilty S + - + 6 Same S
Flower Quality S + + + 6 Worse -
Cookie Hardness S + + + 3
Accessibility S S S + 3
Cookie Size S S S + 3 NOTE:
Ease of Implemetation S - - - 3 If you do not use the above legend symbols,
Order Replenishment - + + + 3 the formulas will not work.
Switching Cost S - - - 3
Quality Controlable S + + + 3
Quantity S + + + 1
Cost to Implement S - - - 1
On Time Delivery S + S + 1
Sum of Positives 0 10 8 12 0
Sum of Negatives 4 3 4 3 0
Sum of Sames 11 2 3 0 0
Weighted sum of Positives 0 41 34 47 0
Weighted sum of Negatives -21 -7 -13 -7 0
Total Weighted Score -21 34 21 40 0
Concept Legend

32. Stakeholder Analysis
Group Key
Representativ
e
Accountable Responsible Consulted Informed Outcome
Accountabl
e
Outcome
Impacted
Output
End
User
Internal/Ext
ernal
Priority
(High/
Med/
Low)
Direct/Indirec
t Involvement
VP Sales Gary Lewis h h h Internal High Direct
Old Plant
Director Of
Operations
Mike Martin h h h h h h Internal High Direct
Old Plant
Line
Manager
Shift
Manager
Larry Jones h h h h h h Internal Med Direct
Old Plant
Production
Line
Employees
Kevin davis h h h h h Internal Low Direct

33. Stakeholder Analysis
(Cont…)
Relationship
with /
Interest in
project
Goals / Success
Criteria
Impact on Project What does the
project need from
this group?
Impact of Project Potential Issues or
Concerns
Needs Management
Strategy / Method
of Communication
Project
Sponsor
To provide funding
and oversight.
Project overseer Ultimate approval ROI, Credibility,
Increased revenue
Financial loss Financial estimates Weekly progress
meeting (Conference
calls)
Project
Manager
Overall direction and
leadership. Ensure
proper project
implementations
Daily project direction Leadership and the
necessary resources
and information
needed
Customer
satisfaction,Customer
demand, Increased
production,
Operational
effectiveness
Timely
implementation and
customer response
Face to Face meetings
concerning project progress .
Understanding of the
provided solution and
approval decision rights.
Consistent dialogue with the
project supervisor and the
master black belt
Conference calls and
daily face to face
meetings
Project
Supervisor
Faciliate the process
improvements and
managing of new
process
Daily project
management
Management and
detail
Quality and process
efficiency
New process
handling and time
Site meetings/visits with
master black belt. Daily
communication with project
manager
Daily Face to face
meetings and training
sessions
Project
Specialist
Successfully carry out
the implementations
and improvement
initiatives
Carry out the new
improvements
Personal insight and
empowerment
Performance and
productivity
Familiarity and
execution
Training

34. Pilot Improved Process
 Go back to the new flour vendor and ask for a flour that
better suits our needs. Meantime buy flour from old vendor
until new vendor provides flour to our specifications.
 Measure the hardness, taste of the cookies, and customer
complaints.
 If measures are bad, return to analyzing data to determine
another cause.
 If measures improve, problem correctly identified and project
a success.

35. Cost Benefit Analysis
Project:
All values based on 12 months of savings starting 6/23/2015 Check One
Initital Estimate
Benefits Final Project Closure Values X
Cost of Services Project Costs
Material reduction Equipment 89,000
Direct Labor reduction Reorganization
Variable Overhead reduction Project Team 10,000
Total Project Costs 89,000
Fixed Overhead Net Annualized Savings 57,500
Lease reductions/eliminations
Indirect Labor reduction Soft Savings (description and quantification):
Maintenance cost reductions 140,000
Cost of Poor Quality
Scrap reduction
Rework reduction 6,500
Warranty cost reduction
Cost Avoidance
One time Savings (Cash Flow)
Benefits Raw material Inventory reduction 29,000
Profit on extra services due to capacity increase WIP Inventory reduction
Finished Goods Inventory reduction
Accounts Receivable reduction
Sale of Unneeded Assets
Total Annualized Benefits 146,500
Total One Time Savings 29,000
Black/Green Belt approval
(Signature and date)
Finance Representative approval
(Signature and date)
Project Benefits
Leonard Burch 6/23/2015
Malyka Austin 6/23/2015
Cookie MonStars Cookie Company
Improved customer service by 50% and increase in sales by
10%!

36. Load the ingredients
into the mixer and mix
6
Turn dough out of
mixer into transport
tub
7
Transport dough to
hopper at production
line
8
Load dough into
hopper
9
Set oven temperature
and conveyor speed
10
Is temperature
correct
11
Press start on
production line
12
Nozzles press out
precise amount of
dough onto conveyor
13
NO
YES
Conveyor runs through
300 foot oven
14
Cookies exit the oven
and are transported to
cooling chambers
15
Samples of each batch
of cookies sent to
quality control
16
Cookies are tested for
taste, texture, and
hardness
17
Do cookies meet
specifications?
18
Entire batch is trash
NO
Cookies are sent to be
packaged
19
YES
Cookies are
transported by truck to
the warehouse
20 Are there orders
from retailers?
21
Store cookies in the
racks
22
Ship the cookies to the
retailer
23
NO
YES
Receive ingredients
from vendor
2
Test 10% of each
ingredient for
proper
specifications
3
Send ingredients to
store room
5
PASS
FAIL
RTV for credit and
ingredients within
specifications
4
Vendor ships
ingredients per order
1
Factory receives order
1
Send request to store
room for ingredients
2
Test ingredients
for quality
3
Transport ingredients
to mixer
4
FAIL
PASS
Do we have correct
ingredients and
quantity?
5
NO
YES
Future State Process Map

37. CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE HARDNESS OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPROVEMENTS
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour
• Hardness parameter returned to satisfactory levels
USL
LSL
UCL
UCL
USL
LSL
UCL
UCL

38. CONTROL CHART MEASURING COOKIE TASTE OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER IMPROVEMENTS
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour
• Taste parameter returned to satisfactory levels

39. Control Phase

40. CMCC Team Members
Cookie MonStar Cookie Company Charter
Tollgate Review Schedule
STATISTICAL DATAKey Findings in Control Phase
Tollgate Scheduled Revised Complete
Define: 6/11/2015 6/15/2015 6/16/2015
Measure: 6/18/2015 6/26/2015
Analyze: 6/30/2015 7/11/2015
Improve: 7/11/2015 7/18/2015
Control: 7/20/2015 7/24/2015
• Suspended contract with New Flour Vendor due to not
meeting quality standards.
• Customer’s complaints decreased after switching back to
older vendor’s flour.
• Older vendor offered us a discount based on weight.
• Considering allowing NEW flour vendor to adjust their
measurements and re-test.

41. PRIMARY METRIC CHART:
CONTROL CHART MEASURING COMPLAINTS OLD FACILITY BEFORE AND AFTER
IMPROVEMENTS
UCL
LCL
• April 2015 reverted to using old vendor’s flour
• Customer complaints decreased
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL
USL
LSL
UCL
LCL

42. Control Plan

43. Communication Purpose Audience Author Vehicle Frequency
Status Reports
To keep key stakeholders
and and team members
aware of progress,
issues, and solutions.
Team members, VP of
Sales, VP of Opertions,
Client Contact
Project manager Email Monthly
Team Meatings
To ensure all team
members are apprised of
progress, changes, and
current priorities
Project team members Project manager Face-to-face
Weekly, Monday and
Thursday @ 9:00 – 10:00
Email Communications
Things that are not
emergencies To
distribute meeting
minutes, alert team
members to document
changes posted, share
information and answer
questions between
meetings.
Project team members,
Client contact, DC
Manager, Old and New
Plant Director of
Operations, Flower
Vendors, Facility
Managers
Project team members,
Client contact, all
Managers, and VPs
Email As needed
Phone / in-person
Emergencies/ things that
require immediate
attention
Team Members, Flower
Vendors, Vice President
of Operations, Facility
Managers, and Retail
Client Contacts
Project team members,
Client contact, all
Managers, and VPs
Company or personal cell
phone when
appropriate.
As needed
Shared Project Folder
Retains all current
project documentation.
Project team members
Project Manager, project
team members
In-Facility Project Office
Location
Upload revisions within
24 hours of the change.
Shared Online Portal
Allows syncroniczation of
all company, vendor, and
stakeholder information.
All team members and
clearanced stakeholders
All team members and
clearanced stakeholders
Stakeholder compnay
computer terminals
Daily; As needed to keep
information valid
Cookie MonStar Communication Plan

44. Implementation Plan

45. SOP for Baking MONSTARS Cookies
Purpose: To ensure that each cookie produced is of consistent color, taste and texture per company specification and
customer expectation.
Responsible Manager: Mike Tomlin
Frequency: Every batch produced
Procedure:
Send request to store room for ingredients
Test ingredients for quality.
Transport ingredients to the mixer.
Check for correct ingredients and quantities of each
Record batch number of each ingredient on production sheet.
Load ingredients into the mixer per the recipe, add dry first then wet.
Press start on the mixer.
Once the mixer stops, turn dough out of the mixer into the transport tub.
Transport the dough to the production line and load into the hopper.
Set the oven temperature to 400 degrees and set the conveyor speed.
Once the temperature reaches 400 degrees press start.
Once the baked cookies exit the oven load on cooling racks to be transported the cooling chambers
Monitored by: Cookie Supervisor – Casey Hampton aka “Big Snack”
Standard Cookie Recipe:*
100 pounds of eggs
250 pounds of flour
125 pounds butter
200 pounds sugar
75 pounds flavoring
130 pounds milk
175 pounds chocolate chips
145 pound of chopped pecans

46. Project Executive Overview
• Project description
o Identify key differences between older and newer facility
o Training on Quality Control standards
• Major changes the project team implemented
o Updated cooking equipment in older facility
o Identified flour as the ingredient causing hardness of cookies
• Description of the critical controlled inputs that brought about the improvement
o Through QC checks, we identified that flour was the component that caused cookie hardness
• Key learning of the project
o Equipment needed upgrading, but was not the main reason for the increase in customer
complaints.
o Our new flour vendor was 12% cheaper—but did not meet our quality standards (not sifted
properly)
o Strengthened the relationship with our old vendor.
• What impact does this improvement have on the business
o Discount received from older vendor with better product.
o Quality Increased, Complaints Reduced and $$$ Saved

47. Control Phase Project Timeline
6/1/2015 6/11/2015 6/21/2015 7/1/2015 7/11/2015 7/21/2015 7/31/2015
Begin Define Phase
SIPOC/ High Level Process Map
Stakeholder Communication Plan
Draft Report Due
Final Report Due
Detailed Process Map
X/Y Matrix
Control Cart Table
Udated Project Status Report
NVA for Analyze Phase
Cause and Effect Matrix
FMEA
Updated Project Status Report
Quick Wins
Pilot Plan
Future State Process Map
Final Report Due
Begin Control Phase
Implementation Plan Template
Final Report Due
Presentation
Cookie Monstars Campaign Project Timeline
Days Complete Days Behind Days Ahead Days Future Today