OE21 Guideline: 5.2a Work Unit Managers Toolkit

OE21 ENGAGE Workbook is an Excel model that includes benchmarks and tools to measure and improve the Work Unit productivity, quality, capability, capacity, cost, and innovation contributions.

IMPORTANT - This particular Workbook should be used as key work unit managers benchmarks, used to compare existing organization practices and tools with the OE21 versions in the Engage Workbook. The suggested approach is to examine each of the benchmarks (productivity, quality, capability, capacity, cost, and innovation) and compare them to similar techniques the organization may be using. If the organization has what it considers better techniques, then these should continue to be used. If the OE21 techniques are considered better, or if the organization has no existing techniques, then the OE21 ENGAGE techniques should be used until better ones are acquired or created by the organization.

 

The Work Manager tab of the OE21 Engage workbook is a model for planning and managing the weekly work and progress of the work units team.

Figure 1 presents the layout of the Work Manager tab

Fig 5.2a-1.PNG
Fig 5.2a-1_1.PNG

Figure 1 Work Manager tab in the OE21 ENGAGE Workbook

​Figure 1 layout of the Work Manager tab includes:

  • Work Unit Team (a list of each work unit person)

  • Calendar (fifty-two weeks ending on Sundays)

  • Work Manager rows  (one for each week of the year)

  • Work Manager columns (12 column groups for planning/managing 12 workforce members' weekly goals). 

  • Goal Leader - Each Work Manager column is assigned to a “goal leader” who is responsible for completing the goals assigned, and includes these inputs:

    • Goals - the title of the goal(s) for each week. Goals might be one or more partial or whole products, services, units, etc. to be completed. Goals might be grouped or individual items to be delivered to internal or external customers. Goals may take one or more workweeks.

    • Lead -  the name of the person assigned to complete the weekly goal(s)

    • Priority - the priority of the goal(s), either High (H), Medium (M) or Low (L)

    • Due by - the date that the goal(s) should be completed

    • Actual % - the percentage (0-100%) of the goal(s) completed as of the end of each workweek

    • Done - this is a formula linked to Actual %.When the Actual % reaches 100% then the Done column displays the Priority (H, M, or L of the goal(s). If the Actual % is less than 100% the priority is left blank

    • CE - this is a number (1, 2, etc.) of customer external quality errors that may occur after the goal(s) are delivered to the external customers. If input, the CE number indicates a significant quality issue. The total CE count is summarized above the CE column. 

    • CI- this is a number (1, 2, etc.) of customer internal quality errors that may occur after the goal(s) are delivered to internal customers in the value chain between work units. If input, the CI number indicates a serious quality issue. The total CI count is summarized above the CE column.

    • Comment field - A short sentence about any CE, CI or other goal (s)-related outputs. Example: The customer rejected product XYZ (one of the goals).

 

The above column groups are repeated 12 times (horizontally) across the Work Manager sheet. This gives the Work Unit Manager the flexibility to assign each group to one Lead person and track that person’s performance over the 52 weeks of the year. Alternatively, these sane 12 column groups may be used to track standardized types of goal(s) that align with internal processes, such as design, fabrication, assembly, test, packaging for delivery, ship to the customer, etc. 

Planning and Management Timeframe - The Work Unit Manager should plan weekly goals as far ahead as they are known, preferably up to six months ahead. In some cases, goals may not be known or understood well enough to plan more than a few weeks ahead. At the end of each workweek, the Work Unit Manager communicates with all goal leaders and determines and then inputs the Actual % for each of the goal(s) planned from the beginning of the year until the current week. If any internal or external customer errors are received, the Work Unit Manager inputs the CE or CI number (count) alongside the goal(s) where errors occurred. This process continues throughout the year.

 

Work Manager Calculations - The Work Manager tab also includes multiple formulas used to collate, summarize and calculate the results of the data input into the model. Calculations include:

  • Total of Done Goals (100% complete; for counts of H, M, and L, versus weighted values for H (10), M (5), AND l (1). 

  • Scores (%) for Done Goals completed versus planned

  • Quality Errors (counts of CE and CI)

  • Other calculations pull the yearly data into the Productivity tab. Figure 2 is an example of tje Productivity Trend Chart of monthly Goals Done % versus Goals Planned % 

 Figure  5.2a-2 Productivity Trend Chart

Fig 5.2a-2.PNG

Figure 2 Productivity Trend Chart

OE21 ENGAGE (Quality) - The Work Unit Manager oversees the weekly completion of assigned goals in the work unit. Once goals reach 100% complete, the outputs are passed to either internal customers in the work unit value chain, or external customers who receive products and services from the organization. The OE21 ENGAGE model contains formulas used to collate summarize and group the CI and CE errors into monthly totals that are used to create the Quality Trend Chart shown in Figure 3.

 

In the event, that goal(s) are not acceptable to internal or external customers, action is taken to record quality errors and to investigate and remove the causes of the quality errors. 

 

Internal and external quality errors are reported back to the Work Unit Manager who is responsible for the goals that became errors. The Work Unit Manager then inputs the number and type (CI or CE) in the applicable Work Manager columns.

 

All quality errors are also reported to the organization’s Quality Manager, who investigates to learn why the errors occurred. In cases where the same causes of quality errors keep occurring, the Quality Manager initiates special action using OE21 Innovator tools (problem analysis, cause analysis, five-why(s) analysis, and solutions analysis). Where serious repetitive quality errors reoccur, the Quality Manager and Operations Focus Team (OFT) may implement to OE21 Process Improvement Workbook, which provides for detailed analysis and solutions to quality problems.

The OE21 ENGAGE model contains formulas used to collate summarize and group the CI and CE errors into monthly totals that are used to create the Quality Trend Chart shown in Figure 3.

Fig 5.2a-3.PNG

Figure 3 Quality Trend Chart

The Quality Trend Chart uses the formulas from the Work Manager model to update month counts of CI and CE errors and to provide for input of the Upper Limit quality error count. Figure F.5a-3 shows an example Upper Limit of four (4) errors per month. An input of the letter “C” is used to trigger the charting of data each month. To the right of the QualityTrend Chart is the Analysis and Action Plan narrative input. The Work Unit Manager provides this narrative.

OE21 ENGAGE (Work Outputs Rating) - The Work Manager model is used as a reference to determine how well the work unit goal leaders are doing their assigned jobs and completing their assigned goals. Located in the Capability Tables tab is the Work Manager Sorted by People table, which groups people alongside their assigned Goals, Priority (H, M or L), and records of Actual % completion, including quality errors and comments. Figure 4 shows an example of this table, sorted by Lead (people responsible for goals). This grouping gives the Work Unit Manager a good idea of how each person is performing. 

Figure 4 Work Manager Sorted by People Table

Fig 5.2a-4.PNG

WORK OUTPUTS RATINGS - Above the Work Manager Sorted by People table is the Work Outputs Rating model, which provides these inputs based on the Work Unit Managers observations of the Work Manager Sorted by People table and the data provided in the Cost and Innovation tabs.

 

The Work Outputs Rating model shown in Figure 5, provides these inputs and calculations: 

  • Productivity - a 1-5 rating of each person’s productivity. Those that complete their assigned goals on schedule without quality errors receive higher ratings than those that are slow to complete goals and receive quality errors (CI and CE) from work outputs.

  • Quality - a 1-5 rating of how well the person’s work is free of quality errors (CI or CE)

  • Cost - a 1-5 rating of how well the person’s work is performed within allocated budgets. People that perform assigned goals without overtime hours or unexpected non-labor costs receive higher ratings than those that require extra hours or non-labor dollars to complete their assigned goals.

  • Innovation - a 1-5 rating of how well the person has provided suggested Innovation Proposals or ideas for improvement or solutions to significant problems. People who often submit Innovation proposals receive higher ratings than those that do not. 

  • Attitude - a strong engagement indicator. A 1-5 rating of how well people demonstrate good attitudes and work well with others. Those that do receive higher ratings than those that do not.

  • Work Outputs - A formula in the Work Outputs Rating model that averages the Productivity Quality, Cost, Innovation, and Attitude ratings.

Figure 5 is an example Work Outputs Rating model with data inputs.

Fig 5.2a-5.PNG

Figure 5 Work Outputs Rating model

OE21 ENGAGE (Work Unit Capability Matrix) - The OE21 ENGAGE model tab named Capability Tables, includes the Work Unit Capability matrix. This model provides records of each work unit members overall capabilities, including:

  • Name and Employee ID

  • Core Competency or Job Role

  • Job-related Training and CertifIcations (Work Unit Managers 1-5 value rating)

  • Job-related Experience (Work Unit Managers 1-5 value rating)

  • Job Instructions and Processes (Work Unit Managers 1-5 rating of how well the person understands and applies job instructions and process procedures)

  • Work Output Ratings - a formula that equals the persons Work Outputs average ratings in the Work Output Rating model.

  • Capability Score - a formula that summarizes the above attribute ratings into a total score in points as compared to the Capability Maximum Score of 25 points

  • Variance - a formula that subtracts the Capability Score from the Capability Maximum Score

  • Score % -  a formula that divides the Capability Maximum Score by the Capability Score, expressed in percent (%) and color-coded to help separate excellent (green) performers from marginal (yellow) or low (red) performers. 

  • Total Capability Score (%) - a formula that averages Score % of all people in the Work Unit. 

 

Figure 6 is an example Work Unit Capability model with data inputs.

Fig 5.2a-6.PNG

Figure 6 iWork Unit Capability model

About the Work Unit Capability Tables Design - This model has been designed to require the least amount of effort for the Work Unit Manager to update and maintain. Unless there are significant changes to the work units team, the model might be updated bi-annually (twice/year). 

Additional points to understand:

  • The Work Unit Manager is usually the ideal person to assess the value of Job-related Training and CertifIcations as well as Job-related Experience and people’s understanding of Job Instructions and Processes. 

  • The Work Manager Sorted by People, Work Output Rating Matrix, and the Work IUnit Capability Matrix requires a minimum of effort to update and maintain.

OE21 ENGAGE (Work Unit Capacity Matrix) - The OE21 ENGAGE model tab named Capability Tables, includes the Work Unit Capacity matrix, located below the Work Unit Capability matrix. This model provides records of future workers with core competency requirements including:

  • Who input the capacity data

  • Core competencies required

  • Current Available versus Current Demand

  • Demand Urgency (1-5 rating of the extent that competency is needed)

  • Demand Date Onboard (date when competency is required)

  • Expected Date (date when the competency should be onboard)

  • Estimated Trai8ning Days (estimate of days to train new competency workers)

  • Job-Related Training and Certifications (that new competency workers should have)

  • Job-Related Experience (that new competency workers should have)

  • Commentary

 

Figure 7 is an example Work Unit Capacity model with data inputs. 

 

Additional points to understand:

  • The Work Unit Capability and Capacity models are maintained by the Work Unit Manager and should be shared with the Human Resources Manager and Workforce Focus Team (WFT).  The HR team can use these data to supplement its own data files for all workers in the organization. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 7 Work Unit Capacity model

 

Additional points to understand:

  • The Work Unit Capability and Capacity models are maintained by the Work Unit Manager and should be shared with the Human Resources Manager and Workforce Focus Team (WFT).  The HR team can use these data to supplement its own data files for all workers in the organization.

 

  • The OE21 5.1a WFT A1 Workforce Capability and Capacity Calculator model is provided for Human Resources use and includes a few additional details about individual workers.

Fig 5.2a-7.PNG

OE21 ENGAGE (Cost Model) - The Work Unit Manager’s cost goal is to manage and control work unit costs within the organization’s allocated budgets for the work unit, including labor hours, and non-labor dollars (materials, suppliers, facilities, equipment, tools, etc.). To help manage cost the Work Unit Managers receive a standard Accounting Work Unit Report from the financial department each month. An example of this report is presented in Figure 8.

 

The Accounting Work Unit report contains this information:

  • Work Unit quantity (number per work unit)

  • Planned Value (PV) Hours budgeted each month

  • Actual Cost (AC) hours expended each month

  • Planned Value Labor $ budgeted each month (average work unit rate x PV Hours)

  • Actual Cost (AC) Labor $ expended each month (AC hours x AC Labor $)

  • Planned Value (PV) Non-Labor $ budgeted each month (non-labor is materials, suppliers, facilities, equipment, tools, etc.).

  • Actual Non-labor $ expended each month

 

At the end of each month, the Work Unit Manager receives the Accounting Work Unit Report and inputs the monthly values into the OE21 Accounting Work Unit Report matrix, located in the Accounting Work Unit Report tab of the OE21 ENGAGE model. 

Fig 5.2a-8.PNG

Figure 8 Accounting Work Unit Report

Additional Information - To the right of the Accounting Work Unit Report matrix are an array of formulas used to calculate Planned Value (PV) versus Actual Cost (AC) variances. Within this matrix, are formulas that bring EV% (Earned Value %) from the Work Manager matrix. These EV% are based on the percent of goals completed. The EV% is normalized for comparison with the PV and AC values. 

The Accounting Work Unit Report calculations provide an automatic update of the Cost Trend Chart. The calculations are presented in Figure 9. Note that the effort required by the Work Unit Manager is greatly simplified. All the Work Unit Manager has to do each month is to update the Accounting Work Unit Report received from the financial department. The calculations do the rest. 

Fig 5.2a-9.PNG

Figure 9 Accounting Work Unit Report Calculations

OE21 ENGAGE - Cost Trend Chart. As soon as this report is updated, the Work Unit Manager refers to the Cost Performance Trend Chart and observes the data presented in Figure 10.

Figure 5a-10 Cost Trend Chart

Fig 5.2a-10.PNG

Figure 10 Cost Performance Chart

As shown in Figure 10, the Cost Trend Chart displays three important comparison trends:

  • PV % (cumulative) - the value of time-phased planned value (budgeted) each month from 0% to 100% for the twelve-month year

  • AC % (cumulative) - the value of the actual cost (labor plus non-labor) expended each month from 0% up to the current month

  • EV % (cumulative) - the value of work actually completed (based on goal completions in the Work Manager tab. 

 

The example in Figure 10 presents this comparison as of date 6/30/Year 

  • PV % is 50%, which means that at this date 50% of the work should be completed

  • AC % is 53.8%, which means that at this date close to 54% of the PV budges is expended

  • EV % is 29.5%, which means that at this date only 29.5% of the work has been completed

 

This comparison tells the Work Unit Manager that the work unit needs to get more productive (more goals done as planned) in order to stay within the target PV% and productivity targets for the year. If these trends continue along the curves shown, the work unit will likely finish the year behind on its goal completions and over-spend on its budget. Figure 11 shows the data table used to create the Cost Trend Chart.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 11 Cost Trend Chart Data Table

Fig 5.2a-11.PNG

Additional Information about Cost Performance Two useful formulas (CPI and SPI) are displayed in this data table.

 

The CPI is the Cost Performance Index, computed as EV/AC (work completed divided by dollars spent). The CPI value as of 6/30 date is $0.55 which means that for every dollar spent to that date, only 55 cents worth of work has been completed.

 

The SPI is the Schedule Performance Index, computed as EV/PV (work completed divided by budgeted dollars to that date). The SPI value as of 6/30 date is $0.59 which means that for the work is significantly behind schedule. If SPI were $1.00 then the work would be on schedule (measured as goals done versus planned).  

Availability Trend Charts - Additional Labor Hours analysis is provided in the Availability Trend Charts located below the Cost Trend Chart and shown in Figure 12.

 

These data come from the same Accounting Work Unit Report and its supporting calculations. As shown in Figure 5a-12, the Actual Labor Hours are being expended significantly faster than the planned labor hours. To the right of the Availability Trend Chart is a Variance Actual Hours chart that shows the negative trend of hours expended. 

The Work Unit Manager uses these Cost Trend Charts as the Dashboard for cost management. The goal is to take timely and appropriate corrective action to keep AC and EV trends as close to the PV budget trend as possible. Note: Professional Project Managers use these kinds of earned value comparisons to keep major projects on schedule, within budgets, and with work being done as planned.

Fig 5.2a-12.PNG
Fig 5.2a-12a.PNG

Figure 12 Availability Trend Charts

OE21 ENGAGE (Innovation Model) - The Work Unit Manager’s innovation goal is to pursue opportunities that deliver a positive customer experience, and to help simplify internal work processes efficiency and effectiveness, reduce waste, avoid rework or customer complaints or returns, and maximize the value of the organization to all of its stakeholders. 

Although Innovation Proposals are not normally planned as Work Manager goals, all workers in the work unit are invited to create and submit Innovation Proposals for the organization’s leadership consideration. The Innovation tab of the OE21 ENGAGE model provides a suggested format and a checklist for Innovation proposals. Innovation proposals can be simple or more detailed.

 

The Work Unit Manager challenges his or herself as well as the worker team to submit any good ideas for improvement and to document these ideas in the Innovation Proposal format.

 

Located below the Innovation Proposal format narrative is a simple Matrix Chart listing date, proposal title, submitted (1), approved (1) if approved, or blank if not. The Goal is the number of Innovation Proposals the Work Unit Managers people have submitted and have been approved. The Score (%) is a formula that divides the cumulative number of Innovation proposals submitted by the number approved. Figure 13 is an example of the Innovation tab for tracking Innovation submittals and approvals. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 13 Innovation Survey Tracking

Note: The Innovation score is used as part of the OE21 REWARDS model.

OE21 ENGAGE (Rewards Upload) - The OE21 ENGAGE model includes a tab named Rewards Upload, an example of which is displayed in Figure 14. 

 

 

 

 

Figure 14 Rewards Upload Matrix

As shown in Figure 14, the Rewards Upload tab is a simple matrix of formula that pull together the five key attributes used to create performance-based Rewards:

  • Productivity % score pulled from Work Manager tab.

  • Quality % score pulled from Work Manager tab.

  • Capability % score pulled from the Capability Tools tab

  • Cost % score pulled from Accounting Work Unit Report analysis formulas

  • Innovation % score pulled from Innovation tab.

 

The % scores for these five attributes are average from 3 months data leading to mid-year and end of year score (%) 

At the end of each Reward Period (normally 30-June and 31-Dec), all Work Unit Managers use the Rewards Upload Survey to upload the data in their Rewards Upload Matrix. The Human Resources Manager receives all uploaded surveys and exports them all in a single Excel file that is input into the OE21 REWARDS model. Link to Rewards Upload Survey. The survey data are used in the OE21 REWARDS Model, which is documented in 5.1a. 

Return TO 5.2a REWARDS Model

Fig 5.2a-13.PNG
Fig 5.2a-14.PNG