Kiosk Configurators

Scenario Let s suppose a bank is testing a new information kiosk that provides customers with rapid approvals on refinancing mortgages. The bank assembles a team, the Kiosk Configurators, to pilot the new system and determine its process capability—or how well it meets customer expectations. 

For our example, the Kiosk Configurators conducted a pilot during which the team measured customer reaction to the time elapsed between when a refinancing request is submitted and when the system displayed the refinancing terms. The team determined that 97 percent of customers are willing to wait up to two minutes before receiving information, 80 percent are willing to wait up to three minutes, and 50 percent will wait four minutes. 

Based on this, the Kiosk Configurators determined that the kiosk should display the refinancing terms within two minutes (120 seconds) for all users. In essence, the team set an upper specification limit (USL) at 120 seconds. There is no lower specification limit (LSL) because an instantaneous response is still acceptable (although very unlikely). 

Process capability is expressed in either the short-term or the long-term. Recall that the Kiosk Configurators determined capability by collecting data from one short period of time. Therefore, they can expect 0.6 percent of customers to have wait times longer than 120 seconds in the short term over the long term, however, they can expect the process to shift and drift, thereby deteriorating process capability. 

For example, let s say the Kiosk Configurators want to significantly improve process capability due to new competitive pressures. They decide to redesign their solution, which is a transactional process comprised of various subprocesses, including but not limited to ... 

The Kiosk Configurators collect some data and discover that 80 percent of loan inquiries are delayed because of the time it takes to receive credit... 

---