operations management report v4

Operations

Management Report

For Wright Architectural Millwork

Rachel Lee, Sid Puthur, Julian Lustig-Gonzalez & Alec Tolivaisa

5/2/2016

Abstract: This document will provide an inside look into the operations of Wright Architectural Millwork and how the Grace Consulting team aimed to improve them. Included will be a description of projects, client feedback, and recommendations.

Operations Management Report

2

Introduction

In August 2015, the management team of Wright Architectural Millwork realized that their

operations relied too heavily on paper. In response to their realization, Wright concocted a series of

projects that aimed to eliminate unnecessary paper and move a majority of their operating

procedures to an electronic format. Since free time is a severely limited commodity for the

company, Wright reached out to the Isenberg School of Management’s M.B.A. program to take on

these projects.

In addition to their desire to go paperless, these projects aimed to solve other

organizational inefficiencies that hamper Wright’s overall projection and profitability. Wright

Architectural Millwork is an organization that prides themselves (and succeeds) on delivering the

utmost quality to their customers. Wright’s secret is that they hold all stakeholders (i.e. employees,

vendors, and partners) to a high standard and have cultivated a culture of constant improvement

on their production floor. Currently, Wright features 43 employees that generate $17 million in

revenue, demonstrated healthy growth and has a solid relationship with their customers, all of

whom are construction managers spread across the Northeast. Wright has the potential to

accelerate their growth, but they do not want a new set of problems that comes along with

accelerated growth. An untrained eye would assume that there is little operational pain and

inefficiencies, but a thorough investigation has uncovered several sources of muda and muri, which

the following projects hope to reduce or eradicate.

Expand Accounting Software

Operational Inefficiencies & Issues

The most obvious operational problem within Wright’s organization is a horizontal

misalignment between back office departments and the production floor. Wright’s production floor


3

thrives on the top-tier standards and procedures set forth by their Project Managers (PM) and

Production Supervisors. Few can produce the quality woodworking that Wright is known for, and

fewer can manage the intricate processes that associated with Wright’s production. However,

Wright’s sense of kaizen remains quarantined to the production floor as their supporting functions

practice a different set of management styles.

A perfect example of Wright’s horizontal misalignment is their purchasing and receiving

processes. When the production floor needs materials, a purchasing agent is alerted and fills out a

purchase order (which does not include prices for the requested materials) request on an MS Excel

template, which is sent over to the PM after population for approval. When the purchase order is

authorized, the purchasing agent places an order with the appropriate vendor. The purchase order

is printed and put in a file cabinet located in a central office that is a considerable distance from the

receiving dock. During this time, the Accounting Department receives an email from the purchasing

agent containing the purchase order, which is downloaded and stored in its proper job’s purchase

order folder. When the requested item arrives, one of two production floor workers, who also act as

a receiving agent will take the item’s package, place it on a rack and wait until the end of the day to

reconcile the package against the purchase order1. According to the Production Floor Manager

(PFM), 30% of the packages are either incomplete or incorrect. The vendor sends its bill to the

Accounting Department, which prompts the Accounts Payable (AP) Clerk to print the referenced

purchase order, staples it to the bill and enters the expense in Wright’s accounting software,

Starbuilder.

Upon the discovery of this process, it was evident that Purchasing, Accounting, and

Receiving needed to get on the same page to make this process more efficient. The original plan was

to expand the capabilities and users on StarBuilder by giving limited access to a PM, purchasing and

receiving agents within the StarBuilder’s Purchasing Module. With expanded use and access, the

1 If an item is quite expensive, the receiving agent will reconcile the package before it leaves the delivery truck because those orders

are non-refundable once they leave the truck.


4

entire purchasing and receiving process would eliminate the need to create paper copies of

purchase orders, and all data could live in one spot. The PFM and co-owner Mike Buell agree that

giving StarBuilder access to the receiving agents will allow the company to set up a computer

station right next to the shipping dock, where an agent can instantly pull up and print a purchase

order and immediately reconcile a delivery.

Methodology

To evaluate the StarBuilder’s capabilities and feasibility of the proposed receiving system,

the Grace Consulting team interviewed the AS, the AP Clerk, an AMSI (StarBuilder’s vendor)

customer service representative on multiple occasions to gain an accelerated understanding of the

software. Also, the team conducted three “test drives” with StarBuilder2 to simulate the receiving

process. Lastly, the team performed separate testing in another Accounting software system,

Intuit’s QuickBooks, which is America’s most popular Accounting software for small to medium-

sized businesses.

Findings & Recommendations

As previously mentioned, the suggested process to streamline Wright’s receiving process

involves putting Purchasing, Receiving and Accounting on a user-friendly Accounting software.

Unfortunately, there are two massive roadblocks are preventing this system from happening:

1. The Accounting Supervisor (AS) does not feel comfortable granting StarBuilder access

to anyone outside of the Account Department. Per their subscription license with AMSI,

Wright is allowed to have six user seats, three of which are empty, the occupied seats all

belongs to employees within the Accounting Department. The AS’s discomfort stems

from a potentially fatal error caused by a non-accounting user and perceived inaccuracy

rate. The AS mentioned that StarBuilder can limit access to different users, in this

2 The team used a “dummy corporation” that contained Wright’s data.


5

scenario, the AS could limit non-Accounting staff access to the Purchasing Module only.

If entry errors occur outside of the Accounting Department, the rest of the financials

records would not be affected since purchase orders do not touch the General Ledger.

The AS’s anxiety will likely evaporate once the additional users finish training and the

intended benefits manifest themselves from the process, such as less paper, fewer hours

spent on data entry and the elimination of matching printed purchase orders to bills.

However, there is a bigger roadblock associated with the project.

2. StarBuilder is not user-friendly, and no-one within the company knows how to use the

Purchase Module, including the Accounting Department. Wright purchased StarBuilder

in the late 1990s from another company that was acquired by AMSI. The person(s) who

sold and trained Wright belongs to a forgotten memory. AMSI’s $8,000 annual

subscription fee includes an annual software update, year-end payroll assistance, and

incident resolution. If the Accounting Department needs support, the AS accesses AMSI’s

website, fills out an incident report, and assign a priority to it. New user training is not

included in AMSI’s service agreement, as Wright would be charged a training fee and

would have to pay for the travel expenses for the trainer, who would be coming in from

either Maryland or North Carolina. Even if the instructor provides an excellent session,

the support quality from AMSI is subpar. Currently, AMSI does not have a member of

their support team that could answer questions for prospective customers. Instead, they

have an outside consultant talk to sales leads regarding the functionally of the software.

To ensure StarBuilder’s usability, two Grace Consulting team members tested the

Purchasing Module along with the AS. Specifically, the members wanted to see:

a. How is a purchase order entered?

b. How to record an item receipt?

c. If purchase order data can automatically populate a bill?


6

d. How the system handled incomplete deliveries?

The test started by using a recent delivery from W.B. Mason and a sandbox version of

StarBuilder. First, a mock purchase order was created, then an incomplete item receipt

was recorded (which happens to 30% of deliveries). However, the system would not

recognize the partial receipt for the rest of the process, which defeats the purpose of

having a Purchasing Module in the first place. Within StarBuilder’s manual, no

information existed on how to handle an incomplete item receipt, and the AS felt the

matter was not a high priority to seek assistance from AMSI3. Regardless the partial

item receipt is only one issue within a much larger problem, StarBuilder’s user interface

and functionality are horrible and would create more waste than reduce it if more users

were allowed access.


From the project’s start, the members had reserved feelings about StarBuilder and asked

Wright’s Management Team if they consider switching to new accounting software, such as

QuickBooks, co-owner Walter Price adamantly stated that they are sticking with StarBuilder. In his

words, “[StarBuilder] is a Ferrari that we drive like a Volvo.” Even though Mr. Price oversees the all

of Wright’s operations, his opinion of StarBuilder is without merit as he is not an active user of the

software. In fact, it seems that Mr. Price practices a laissez-faire management style with his

Accounting Department. Another explanation for Wright’s adherence to StarBuilder is the

transitional cost of switching over to another system in terms of time and capital. This feeling stems

from an ignorance of other available accounting software. For instance, QuickBooks offers an

Enterprise version that includes Advanced Inventory tracking and fully functional purchasing

management tools and reports. QuickBooks has a beautiful design, top-notch customer service, a

3 It is important to note that the Accounting Department is a physical mess with scattered papers everywhere and documents from

five years ago taking up valuable shelf space.


7

robust user interface, readily available resources, and would be $3,100 cheaper than StarBuilder4.

Further investigation revealed that Intuit has an in-house data conversion team that would most of

Wright’s StarBuilder data and plug that into QuickBooks. Lastly, given Wright’s size and various

software expertises, it would take two months of QuickBooks training to make users comfortable

with the software. During the training period, Wright should continue to use StarBuilder to prevent

an operational shutdown.

The last time Wright had a StarBuilder training session was fifteen years ago; it is now

considered “legacy software,” with few masters and experts in the country, never mind Wright. If

the AS were to leave Wright for whatever reason, it would be quite difficult for someone else to

perform at her level because of StarBuilder’s long acclimation period. Also, whoever becomes the

receiving agent will not take the necessary time to learn a complicated piece of software such as

StarBuilder. To ensure continued quality from the Accounting Department and a better receiving

process, Wright needs to reconsider their expensive relationship with StarBuilder.

Reactions from Management

While investigating StarBuilder’s capabilities, both the AS and AP Clerk asked what Grace

Consulting’s plans were that involved StarBuilder. After hearing the plan to manage the purchasing

and receiving process within StarBuilder, the AP Clerk remarked: “that just seems like more work.”

Not initially communicated to the AP Clerk was that Accounting would not be entering purchase

orders nor item receipts into StarBuilder, in fact, the data from the purchase orders would

(hopefully) automatically populate related bills. Once she understood that part, she became

relieved and mentioned that it would be beneficial if there was a “receiving book” filled with open

purchase orders right next to the receiving dock, so receiving agents can quickly reconcile

packages. Mr. Buell vetoed the suggestion because he felt inclement weather would ruin the book.

Instead, Mr. Buell thought that having a computer station or a tablet near the dock would be a

4 Price is based on purchasing a Platinum Subscription with ten user seats.


8

better option, which is why expanding access to StarBuilder is paramount, as the computer station

will be worthless without StarBuilder’s data.

At their final meeting with Wright, the Grace Consulting team made a pitch for a switch to

QuickBooks. Mr. Price, Mr. Buell and the PFM clearly saw the proposed receiving process system,

the Advanced Inventory functionality and the full lifespan of a job on the software. Mr. Price

mentioned that he thought QuickBooks was only for small businesses and that Wright’s operations

were too complicated for it. The Grace Consulting team told Mr. Price that the Enterprise Version

has successfully worked for companies that are three times the size of Wright, and mentioned

Intuit’s data conversion team and the two-month transition period. Mr. Price and company decided

to discuss the Accounting system amongst themselves further for the time being. However, they

were intrigued by the relative ease of using QuickBooks and its potential to integrate siloed

departments.

Electronic Time Tracking


The PFM stated, “We calculate that our current time tracking system costs us $65,000 per

year [in waste].” Throughout the production floor, there is a significant emphasis on acquiring the

latest technology and machines to uphold Wright’s reputation. However, there is one piece of

equipment neglected from modernization which spawns daily muda, their time clock. Wright

requires their employees to use a single analog time clock to “punch in/out” everyone. Also, each

employee is required to complete a paper timesheet on a daily basis, based on each task performed

and its completion time. Wright’s PFM spends an hour each day manually inputting the timesheet in

MS Excel, while Accounting’s Accounts Receivable (AR) Coordinator inputs the same data into a

separate MS Excel file, which feeds into their payroll provider’s website, Paychex. Lastly, the AR

Coordinator performs another manual data entry, this time in StarBuilder. In essence, the same


9

data is manually entered three times on a weekly basis. Fortunately, upper management is well-

aware of this problem and are looking to transition to an exclusively electronic process for time

tracking.

Eliminating payroll data entry should be simple as there are a variety of vendors that can

replace paper time cards with ID badges and the analog time clock with a digital model that can

send data directly to their Accounting software. However, the job/task tracking solution is more

complex and needs an advanced solution with full employee support.

Methodology

Wright’s management had a few key requirements for an electronic time tracking system: it

should be user-friendly, involve little data entry from their PFM, integrates with their Accounting

software system and not replace old muda with new muda. An example of new muda would be

employees walking from their workstation to a time check-in station that is on the other side of the

production floor. The ultimate goal is to eliminate the paper-and-pen method of recording data.

According to the Toyota Way, the best improvement ideas will come from going to the

gemba, or “the real place.” With going to gemba in mind, asking the production floor employees

about the different time tracking issues and ideas was paramount to determine the most optimal

solution as they will be working with the solution every working day. The PFM gathered ten

production floor workers5 for a “focus group” and were presented with the following questions:

How they entered their time on a daily basis: From a managerial perspective, the

desired method of timesheet entry is to update the sheet immediately after a task is

completed. However, in general, many employees procrastinate filling out their

timesheet until the end of the day. At Wright, roughly half of the workers waited until

the end of their shift to complete their timesheets. With only one check-in station, this

5 The PFM was also present at the meeting, which threatened the integrity of the meeting, but the employees were truthful with

their answers.


10

creates a backlog of employees at 5:00 pm. The Grace Consulting team determined that

the new time tracking solution will need to remind employees to submit their daily time

sheets at a particular time.

How many workers carry a smartphone on the production floor: The original time

tracking prototype involved using mobile devices to replace the paper timesheets. A few

weeks before the focus group, the PFM was asked how many workers have a

smartphone on hand. He estimated that everyone had one, but roughly half of them

have their phone handy. The responses during the focus group told a different story. Of

the ten focus group members, only three had a smartphone with them, and another

person had a flip phone that he refuses to give up. The only reason people bring their

phones to the production floor is for family emergencies; the other employees feel their

phones would distract their work, which poses a huge safety risk. Even the PFM had

concerns about his employees’ concentration level with their cell phones on them.

However, considering the high skill and professionalism throughout the production

floor, it is unlikely that having a smartphone will detract from Wright’s quality output.

Would anyone volunteer to test out different time tracking proposals: Three production

floor workers6 volunteered to test drive the mobile application “TSheets” on his

smartphone for one week and give feedback.


The solution was separated into three tiers based on functionally:

1. Regular Mobile App. This solution is baseball’s equivalent of hitting a single. The

highest rated time tracking app on the Google Play Store was TSheets. To use the app, an

employee selects a job and task code (from a work order that travels with the project’s

progression) and presses “start” on the app’s interface. When the employee completes

6 One worker changed his mind and whittled down the number of testers to two.


11

the task, he/she presses “stop” and selects a new job and task codes. All data feeds to an

administrator’s computer in real-time and is exportable to CSV, XLS, and PDF formats. If

an employee makes an entry error, an administrator can effortlessly fix the inaccuracy

with one mouse click. The software’s data also uses a “flat file” to integrate with

Wright’s payroll processor, Paychex, which reduces the AR coordinator’s entry time.

TSheets allows administrators to update the list of active job/task codes and assign

individual access for each code, reducing the amount of scrolling an employee must sort

through to record his/her productivity. Every device with TSheets access will synch

with job code updates automatically. TSheets is a “software-only” vendor as they do not

provide hardware nor can they process barcodes. Thus, all data entry happens on an

employee’s smartphone (or a device that has an internet connection, such as a laptop or

tablet). TSheets charges a $16 base monthly fee plus $4 per additional user.

2. Mobile App with Barcode. This solution is equivalent to hitting a double. The spectrum

of time tracking vendors that offer a barcode feature is quite narrow. Among the few

providers of the necessary feature, StandardTime had the most potential. An employee

would start the time tracker by scanning a “start” code (usually his/her name or

employee ID number), which will begin a timer on an administrator’s dashboard. Then

the employee would scan a job and task barcode on the work order sheet, which

populates on the administrator’s dashboard. Once the task is complete, the employee

would scan a “finish” code which stops the dashboard’s timer. The data exports into a

CSV format, where it converts into a TXT format suitable for an upload into StarBuilder.

Afterward, the data travels to a shared database for storage. To scan time tracking

barcodes, an employee would have to access the StandardTime app or use a scan gun

plugged into a desktop or laptop computer with the StandardTime software installed.

StandardTime charges a monthly subscription of $14.99 per user.


12

3. Wireless barcode reader. This solution is a home run. Every employee would be

assigned a wireless barcode reader and not interact with any software at all. This

solution was infeasible in the short-term because of cost (the cheapest compatible

reader costs $300), and expertise level as each reader must be configured to Wright’s

computer network to allow data transmission through the production floor’s WiFi to an

administrator’s computer.

As previously mentioned, two employees volunteered to the test the proposed time tracking

solutions for a week. Thankfully, both TSheets and StandardTime provided a free trial period that

provided full functionality. TSheets was the first solution tested because it was easier to configure

on both the employee’s smartphones and the PFM’s desktop. While the two volunteers played with

TSheets, setting up StandardTime for testing became an onerous task, as it was impossible, even

with assistance from a StandardTime representative, to link a potential employee’s smartphone to

an administrator’s computer. At the end of the TSheets testing week, StandardTime’s connectivity

issue was still unresolved, prompting the decision to abandon the StandardTime solution

altogether7.

The employees gave outstanding insight and feedback into the TSheets solution. First, the

workers said that an edit feature must be available as entry mistakes are inevitable. Also, they

stated that asking employees to use their smartphones to track time would be a bad idea since the

majority of floor workers are not comfortable using a smartphone for basic functions, never mind

advanced business software. Another suggestion was setting up multiple time tracking kiosks in

highly congested areas on the production floor, which inspired positive feelings from the

volunteers. Along with the PFM, the two volunteers pointed out seven optimal locations to install a

7 Also factoring into the StandardTime drop was its terrible user interface.


13

kiosk. These kiosks would contain Chromebooks8 that would only have access to the TSheets

website.

The PFM also wanted all generated data to feed directly into StarBuilder. Thankfully, an MS

Excel macro can manipulate TSheets data into a convertible format that will upload into the

Accounting software.


The Grace Consulting team explained to Mr. Price, Mr. Buell, and the PFM about the barren

landscape of time tracking vendors that provide barcode scanning. Part of the explanation was the

difficulty of setting up and testing a wireless barcode reader that would feed into the PFM’s

computer. Despite the validity of the Grace Consulting team not presenting a “ready to go” time

tracking solution, the management team had signs of disappointment on their faces. However,

throughout the entire project, Wright’s management team had a stoic demeanor towards the Grace

Consulting team, making it difficult to make an informed judgment of their feelings towards the

quality of Grace Consulting’s work.

MS Excel Linkages


Modern PMs use a Gantt Schedule to plan and track a project from client approval to

completion. Instead of using expensive and complicated software to manage their Gantt Schedule

and its associated documents, Wright chooses to superimpose their Gantt Schedule onto MS Excel.

Thankfully, MS Excel can replicate the functionally of expensive software through VBA (Visual Basic

for Applications) Code, Macros, Reference Formulas and Data Validation. Unfortunately, Wright

uses none of the necessary advanced features to manage their Project Management tools optimally.

8 A Chromebook laptop retails at $179 and has a keyboard, while an iPad tablet would cost $199.


14

According to Wright’s Senior Project Manager (SPM), the Project Management team uses roughly

25% of MS Excel’s capabilities and functions. To populate a Gantt Schedule, a PM must take data

from a Job Estimate by Phase (JEBP), which represents the items and services that a client has

agreed to purchase from Wright, and manually paste it into the Gantt Schedule and a Schedule of

Values (SOV) spreadsheet. Also, a PM must incorporate a Purchase Change Order (PCO), a request

for additional items and materials to an on-going job, in both the Gantt Schedule and the SOV.

Lastly, the Gantt Schedule needs data from a “Finish Value” spreadsheet, which is a running total of

labor hours performed on each task within the job.

The SPM mentioned that his team must manually copy and paste data between these

workbooks every time there is a project update. Also, since Wright’s PMs forgo Data Validation,

there is no poka-yoke or error proofing that lives inside these critical reports.

Thankfully, the SPM is aware of his team’s MS Excel shortcomings and arranged for his staff

to participate in MS Excel training classes. However, MS Excel is not designed for database

management, and it would be prudent for the PMs to work with the same data that the rest of

Wright uses, which will enhance horizontal alignment.

Methodology

From the project’s start, the Grace Consulting team was advised that Wright’s reliance on

MS Excel for Project Management was unsustainable. Instead, the Grace Consulting team was

directed to enable new technology for Wright’s Project Management. During Grace Consulting’s

StarBuilder research, it was discovered that AMSI offers a sister software called “StarProject,”

which handles Project Management tasks. The Grace Consulting team decided to assess

StarBuilder’s user interface to see if expanding StarBuilder could additionally solve the Project

Management software problem. As previously mentioned, the StarBuilder expansion efforts

flopped, forcing the Grace Consulting team to reconsider its feelings towards an MS Excel solution.


15

After the Grace Consulting team’s second meeting with Wright, the SPM gave the team a “zip

file” that contained the templates of Wright’s Project Management spreadsheets, along with a

recent job. When the decision was made to revisit the MS Excel project, the SPM educated the Grace

Consulting team about the given spreadsheets. With a basic understanding, the Grace Consulting

team felt more confident that a long-term MS Excel solution was possible, given the creation of new

standards and procedures related to the software. While developing VBA code, the Grace Consulting

team kept in constant contact with the SPM for needed clarity.


Wright’s MS Excel templates lacked uniformity and standardization, interfering with the

progression of the VBA code’s development. Instantly, the Grace Consulting team tweaked the JEBP

and PCO templates to include data validation and introduce a uniformed format. Originally, Wright

wanted instant updates across all workbooks when data was altered or added to one spreadsheet;

however the Grace Consulting team deemed that request as a creator, not an eliminator, of muda.

Instead, the Grace Consulting team decided to create buttons on the spreadsheets themselves that

would take data from one workbook and place it in another workbook. Behind those buttons are

nearly three hundred lines of VBA code that went through an extensive three-week trial-and-error

period. Lastly, a VBA code prototype was brought to the SPM, which was tweaked to mesh with

Wright’s network specifications.

In addition to the VBA code, the Grace Consulting team outlined a series of guidelines to

maintain the integrity of its code:

Once the client approves the JEBP, the Estimator should press the two buttons on the

spreadsheets, which will remove all blank and zero value rows (known as the

“Squisher” macro), and prep the data to travel to the Gantt Schedule. Lastly, the

Estimator should lock the workbook via password protection.


16

In some cases, there are multiple PCO and Finish Value workbooks in one project. The

SPM could not think of any reason where having multiple workbooks is a good idea.

Apparently, all PCO and Finish Value data should only live in one workbook or the Gantt

Schedule, and SOV will have incomplete data

In the PCO workbook, each item has either a “pending” or “approved” status. The Gantt

Schedule will take items that have an “approved” status while the SOV takes all entries

and sorts them by status. In some PCO workbooks, there is a third status value, which

does not mesh with the SOV formatting. The new PCO template has data validation that

will only allow a “pending” or “approved” status.

Previously, the SOV and Gantt Schedule were in separate workbooks; however it is more

sensible to put the two reports in the same workbook because the SOV’s data comes

directly from the Gantt Schedule. The SPM stated that the SOV is separated from the

Gantt Schedule because Accounting uses the SOV to enter data in StarBuilder and it

would create chaos if both a PM and an Accounting staff member were accessing the

same workbook simultaneously. To ensure that Accounting’s procedures do not

interfere with Project Management, the VBA Code will create a copy of the SOV

spreadsheet in a new workbook that a PM can save in the job’s Accounting folder after

pressing the PCO update button.

Along with incorporating the MS Excel update buttons into standard operating procedures,

the Project Management department needs to continue training on MS Excel. Their areas of focus

should be learning VBA coding and macros for the off chance that they need to fix or adjust the

Grace Consulting team’s VBA code or achieve the same results with other processes managed on the

MS Excel platform.


17


Initially, the Grace Consulting team decided to forgo the MS Excel Linkage project and

attempted to put the Project Management process on StarProject; there were some grumblings

within Wright’s management group. However, once the Grace Consulting team announced the

revival of the MS Excel Linkage project, Mr. Price acted a bit surprised, feeling the Grace Consulting

team put the project “on the shelf.”

If the reformatting of the JEBP template and its “Squisher” macro were the only deliverables

associated with MS Excel, the SPM would have considered the project as a success. Instead, the SPM

was astonished by the results of the Grace Consulting team’s VBA code. “This will easily save my

team lots of time, and cut down on errors,” said the SPM as he tested the final version.

Despite their stoic demeanor, the results from the VBA code managed to draw noticeable,

positive reactions from both Mr. Price and Mr. Buell. They both remarked that the finished result

was a perfect match with what they had in mind at the start of the project.

Project Management Manual


In the Project Management process, there is a noticeable lack of standardization. Each PM

performs his job in a unique way (classic Gilbreth problem). Best practices are not easily shared

and communicated, implying a lack of traditional knowledge. Without standards, continuous

improvement cannot happen.

A Project Management manual does exist, but its last update occurred several years ago.

Many of the processes described in the manual did not reflect Wright’s recent move to an electronic

filing system. Additionally, the manual was a hodgepodge collection of documents written by

several different people, with different editorial styles and formatting. Lastly, the old manual was

hard to follow, with no table of contents or a clear flow from one section to another.


18

The lack of standardization makes the onboarding process more difficult for new hires. New

PMs must distil a significant amount of information from more experienced PMs or simply learn the

job on the fly. The old Project Management manual was not considered a “go-to” resource for the

department. Thus, the SPM was drawn away from many of his tasks to answer fundamental

questions and bring along new hires. Due to the SPM’s high-quality expectations and the stress of

the job, Wright has experienced significant turnover in the PM role. The SPM estimated that only

one in twenty PMs last beyond a year within the company.

Methodology

Wright was completely aware of these issues within the Project Management department

and suggested including the updated the Project Management manual among the Grace Consulting

team’s projects. Wright handed the Grace Consulting team a marked up PDF that contained the

hand-written suggestions for edits. An initial read-through revealed that the manual had many

grammatical errors and problems with cohesiveness. Before performing any major edits, the PDF

was converted to MS Word. Once in MS Word, the document could be edited for clarity and re-

formatted with appropriate headings, labels, and lists.

However, before completing any major edits, the Grace Consulting team met with the SPM

to resolve several questions about terminology, as much of the manual used industry jargon. After

clearing up these matters, most abbreviations were spelled out to enhance readability for new

hires. Several flow charts and processes were re-written to reflect current standards. The Grace

Consulting team worked with the Project Management department to create these new sections.

Additionally, several processes were distilled into checklists as a way to institute error-proofing.

After finalizing the content, the entire document was indexed for easy navigation. Within

the new PDF, bookmarks, a linkable table of contents, and a search feature dramatically improved

the accessibility of information within the PDF. Included in the manual were all documents

referenced in the manual, located the appendix at the end of the procedural section. Lastly, special


19

care was taken to select an attractive font and layout that reflected Wright’s commitment to quality

and good design.


Updating Wright’s Project Management manual allowed the Grace Consulting team to gain a

deeper understanding of the company as Project Management is the lifeblood of the organization.

The team saw how complex and intertwined estimating, purchasing, production, shipping,

installation, and billing was. Still, the Grace Consulting team was surprised to see how little thought

went into implementing standardized operating procedures.

The Grace Consulting team recommends that the Project Management department review

the updated manual with all PMs and get feedback. After everyone is on board with the processes,

reviewing a “procedure of the week” could keep the material fresh and alert PMs to any needed

changes to the manual. The Grace Consulting team also recommends instituting more checklists. A

broad, interdepartmental team, could be formed to determine essential parts of each task. Lastly,

the Grace Consulting team believes that the new Project Management manual can act as a template

for manuals in other departments, such as Accounting, Estimation, Purchasing, and Receiving.

Beyond the Project Management manual and standardization, a more long-term

recommendation would be to explore Enterprise Resource Planning and Project Management

software that would replace the sophisticated MS Excel documentation Wright currently uses.

Presently, there are no warning poka-yokes to alert PMs of critical dates or important shipments.

Instead, the PMs must rely on inconsistent horizontal communication and their own intuition to

ensure they are meeting deadlines and moving forward with the project as scheduled. The

inconsistent communication allows for many errors and delayed projects, which affects customer

service and ultimately Wright’s bottom line. Applying zero quality control to the Project

Management department will significantly increase efficiency, reduce costs, and bolster Wright’s

reputation for quality.


20


The new Project Management manual was well received. As past versions only existed as

paper, the executive management team was excited to have an electronic copy that was more

accessible. Mr. Price and Mr. Buell wanted to know how easy editing the document would be. The

Grace Consulting team assured them that the MS Word document was not complicated and could

quickly be changed to reflect modifications to processes.

The SPM said that the manual will be required reading for all of his PMs. He was excited to

have such a detailed, yet high-level overview of the requirements of the PM position. The SPM felt

that the manual will be invaluable to new hires and significantly reduce the cognitive load

associated with learning Wright’s norms, procedures and culture. He was also relieved to have a

resource to direct his current PMs to for answers to questions, freeing himself up for more value-

adding tasks.

Lessons Learned

As a group, the Grace Consulting team was impressed by Wright’s resiliency. The company

has been around for over forty years, yet their determination to become the industry standard for

quality has not subsided. A focus on kaizen within the production process has enabled Wright to

endure through tough times such as the Great Recession of 2008. By being willing to experiment

with non-wood materials, Wright has proactively adjusted to a dynamic external environment.

However, to remain relevant and competitive, this determination and focus on quality must

be applied throughout all departments. Organizational communication will be crucial to this

process, but the Grace Consulting team witnessed how difficult horizontal communication can be at

times. Some entrenched processes must change if the company wants to move forward and become

leaner. Without buy-in from all levels, this will be a slow, if not impossible, task.


21

For the StarBuilder and MS Excel projects, the Grace Consulting team was introduced to the

harsh reality of balancing planning and prototyping. At the project’s start, the Grace Consulting

created a project timeline and hoped to stick its schedule. However, the StarBuilder project fell

behind because the Grace Consulting team waited longer than necessary to test the software. The

Grace Consulting team opted to perform an extensive investigation on StarBuilder’s functions

through reading training materials provided by AMSI. Generally speaking, the best way to learn a

skill is to practice it early and often, this axiom held true with the StarBuilder project as earlier

testing would have prompted Grace Consulting to make an earlier assessment on StarBuilder’s

quality. With an earlier StarBuilder assessment, the MS Excel linkage project would have had an

earlier start date. With the more time, a two-week testing period of the VBA code with the entire

Project Management staff would have commenced, providing the Grace Consulting team with

additional feedback.

In comparison, the amount of planning performed with the time tracking solution was

necessary even though providing working solution ended in futility. The extended planning period

resulted from determining an optimal workflow, researching different market solutions (such as

workforce management), and in-house testing. Before presenting a test case to Wright, every viable

solution was tested within the Grace Consulting team. The balance between planning and prototype

relies on client’s interaction with the solution. It seemed that quickly prototyping within the team

made more sense while a longer planning period to design a prototype for Wright’s use was the

most prudent action.

Internally, the Grace Consulting team learned the real importance of teamwork within a

professional setting. The Grace Consulting team consisted of four members with a diverse

background, skills and communication styles, which led to the task delegation tailored to each

member’s capabilities. Open dialogue became a critical component of every stage of the overall

project. Clear communication always presented the Grace Consulting team as a unified group to


22

Wright and maintained a level of professionalism9. By making meeting times periodic and regular,

the Grace Consulting team established a culture and routine of open dialogue, the same

environment that will hopefully foster itself at Wright.

The project was a great learning experience for all parties. There were high points full of

enthusiasm, motivation, and productivity. There were also pain points where internal conflict,

postponed deadlines, client dissatisfaction and hindering complications which threatened to tear

the Grace Consulting team apart. Having an efficient and experienced team can make any project

manageable, no matter how obstinate the obstacles or insurmountable the challenges are.

9 Wright’s management also held the Grace Consulting team to high professional standards, such as sending an agenda 48 hours

before their weekly meetings.

operations management report v4

Documents