Six Sigma Tool Navigator: The Master Guide for Teams
Tool description
The team process assessment technique verifies team performance using a Likert rating scale. Areas of interest such as problem-solving activities, team dynamics, and administrative procedures are rated, and results are fed back to the team for the purpose of continuous improvement.
Typical application
-
To rate a team's process and progress.
-
To monitor the effectiveness of team meetings.
-
To provide performance feedback.
Problem-solving phase
| → | Select and define problem or opportunity |
| → | Identify and analyze causes or potential change |
| → | Develop and plan possible solutions or change |
| Implement and evaluate solution or change | |
| Measure and report solution or change results | |
| → | Recognize and reward team efforts |
Typically used by
| Research/statistics | |
| Creativity/innovation | |
| Engineering | |
| 2 | Project management |
| Manufacturing | |
| Marketing/sales | |
| 4 | Administration/documentation |
| Servicing/support | |
| 3 | Customer/quality metrics |
| 1 | Change management |
Notes and key points
-
Rating averages used:
-
Rating scale used: 5 = Very satisfactory
-
4 = Satisfactory
-
3 = Average
-
2 = Unsatisfactory
-
1 = Very unsatisfactory
-
before
-
Team meeting evaluation
-
Surveying
-
Questionnaires
-
Interview Technique
-
Gap Analysis
after
-
Rotating Roles
-
Different Point of View
-
Run-It-By
-
Critical Dialogue
-
What-If-Analysis
Step-by-step procedure
-
STEP 1 The team leader or facilitator collects all completed team meeting evaluations from the participants. See example Team Mfg.—No. 1 Assessment.
-
STEP 2 Next, all responses are summarized and results are compared to those of the previous analysis. Of particular interest may be the rating averages and any patterns or variations from the expected results.
-
STEP 3 The rating results and suggestions made by participants are discussed at the beginning of the next scheduled team meeting.
-
STEP 4 All completed forms are dated and saved for pattern analysis.
Example of tool application
Team: Mfg.—No. 1 Assessment
| Team: Mfg.—No. 1 Meeting Evaluation No. 3 | Date xx/xx/xx | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participants' Observations/Perceptions | Participant Responses | | ||||||||||||
| 1. The team meeting started/ended on time | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | — | — | 4.25 | |||
| 2. The agenda was displayed and followed | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | — | — | 4.38 | |||
| 3. Team members understood meeting's purpose | 4 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 5 | — | — | 3.88 | |||
| 4. The team's action log was reviewed | 4 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | — | — | 4.75 | |||
| 5. All team members participated | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3 | — | — | 2.63 | |||
| 6. The facilitator kept meeting on topic | 4 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4— | — | 4.38 | ||||
| 7. Team communications were open and supportive | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 3 | — | — | 4.00 | |||
| 8. The team managed time efficiently | 5 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | — | — | 4.13 | |||
| 9. Good progress was made during this meeting | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 5 | — | — | 4.13 | |||
| 10. Team used appropriate decision-making methods | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 4 | — | — | 3.25 | |||
| 11. Next step action items were assigned | 5 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | — | — | 3.88 | |||
| 12. The facilitator summarized results | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | — | — | 4.50 | |||
| File: Team–Mfg.–No. 1 | Overall team average | |||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||
Категории