Working Smart for
Environmental Protection
Improving State Agency Processes with
Lean and Six Sigma
September 2006
EGOS
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
-------
Acknowledgments
This primer was developed through a collaborative, state-led process involving representatives from five
States—Delaware, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska—and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. EPA's National Center for Environmental Innovation (NCEI) and the Office of Policy Analysis
and Review in EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) provided advisory and contractor support to this
state-led effort. Ross & Associates Environmental Consulting, Ltd. prepared this primer under
subcontract to Industrial Economics, Inc. (EPA Contract # EP-D-04-006).
The state workgroup coordinating the development of this primer included the following agencies:
D Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
D Iowa Department of Natural Resources
D Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
D Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
° Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
-------
-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary i
1. Introduction 1
Typical Results from State Process Improvement Efforts 1
Questions Addressed in This Primer 1
2. Lean and Six Sigma for Government 3
Trends in Environmental Agency Process Improvement 3
Lean and Six Sigma Process Improvement Methods 4
Adapting Lean and Six Sigma for Government 6
3. State Environmental Agency Lean and Six Sigma Initiatives 7
Overview of State Process Improvement Efforts 7
Project Initiation 8
Implementation Approaches 9
Process Improvements and Results 9
Organizational Deployment and Diffusion 10
4. Lessons Learned About Lean and Six Sigma in Government 13
Key Considerations for Project Design and Implementation 13
Summary of Lessons Learned 14
5. Future Directions and Next Steps 17
Appendix A: Resources 21
Appendix B: Sample Question and Answer Document for Kaizen Events 23
Appendix C: Additional Information about State Lean and Six Sigma
Implementation Experience 25
Appendix D: State Summaries 31
Delaware Lean Process Improvement Initiative 33
Iowa Lean Six Sigma Business Process Improvement Initiative 35
Michigan Lean Process Improvement Initiative 39
Minnesota Six Sigma Process Improvement Initiative 41
Nebraska's Business Process Improvement Initiative 45
-------
List of Text Boxes
Box 1: Common Permitting Process Wastes 3
Box 2: Seven "Deadly" Process Wastes 4
Box 3: Key Drivers 4
Box 4: Comparing Lean and Six Sigma 5
Box 5: Criteria for Project and Process Selection 8
Box 6: Common Metrics Used for State Lean and Six Sigma Projects 9
Box 7: Key Success Factors 13
Box 8: Overcoming Staff Resistance to Lean and Six Sigma 14
Box 9: Lean Event Implementation Steps 25
Box 10: Six Sigma Implementation Steps 25
Box 11: Lean and Six Sigma Technical Assistance Providers 26
Box 12: Boundary Conditions 27
Box 13: Team Composition 28
Box 14: Characteristics of Lean Six Sigma Deployment Models 29
List of Tables
Table 1: State Environmental Agency Process Improvement Initiatives.
-------
Executive Summary
Several state environmental agencies have dramatically improved agency permitting and administrative
processes using business process improvement methods such as Lean and Six Sigma. Within a few
months of implementation, Delaware, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska agencies have
drastically reduced permit application backlogs, reduced lead times for permit reviews by more than 50
percent, decreased the complexity of permit application forms, improved the consistency of permit
reviews, and made more staff time available for "mission critical" work. They did all of this while
improving staff morale and increasing the transparency of their processes to stakeholders, without
sacrificing environmental protection goals or reducing value-added permit review time.
Lean and Six Sigma Work for Government
Lean is a production approach and set of methods that seeks to eliminate all non-value added activity or
"waste" from a process, while Six Sigma is a collection of statistical tools designed to reduce defects and
other forms of process variation. Lean and Six Sigma were originally developed for manufacturing
systems; however, private and public-sector organizations have adapted and applied these methods
(sometimes combined as "Lean Six Sigma") to office environments, service-delivery processes, and
administrative processes including permitting. Interest among state environmental agencies in these
methods has grown rapidly since 2003, when the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA) began their Lean and Six Sigma initiatives.
Lean and Six Sigma efforts identify and eliminate unnecessary and non-valued added process steps and
activities that have built up over time. In non-manufacturing settings, waste is most prevalent in the
information flows associated with processes. Lean and Six Sigma efforts are not just about fixing broken
processes. State agencies have found that these methods enable them to understand how their processes
are working on the ground and to make adjustments that optimize desired outcomes. By getting routine
activities and mechanisms of a process to function smoothly and consistently, staff time can be freed to
focus on higher value activities that are more directly linked to environmental protection.
State Agency Lean and Six Sigma Experience
The successful use of Lean and Six Sigma process improvement methods by multiple state environmental
agencies means these approaches may have broad applicability to help agencies achieve environmental
outcomes more efficiently and effectively. State agencies have applied Lean and Six Sigma methods to
all types of agency processes, including air construction permitting, National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater discharge permitting, and leaking underground storage tank
corrective action reporting and implementation.
Highlights of state agency experience include the following:
° Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control used value stream
mapping—a process-mapping method used to identify non-value added activity and plan for
future improvement projects—to improve its air construction permitting process in 2005, and it
plans to apply value stream mapping to five more processes starting in fall 2006.
D Iowa DNR has conducted 17 kaizen events—week-long events focused on making immediate
process changes to eliminate waste—on a wide range of agency processes, starting with air
construction permitting in 2003. The Agency plans to continue and expand upon its initiative.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — i
-------
D Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) applied value stream mapping to the
Air Quality Division's permit to install application review process in 2004 and to two additional
processes in 2005 and 2006.
D Minnesota PCA has initiated 21 Six Sigma improvement projects, starting with an NPDES
wastewater permitting project in 2004. The Agency's Six Sigma initiative has focused on both
regulatory and non-regulatory processes.
° Nebraska DEQ conducted a kaizen event on air quality construction permitting in 2005,
followed by a post-kaizen workshop for new staff. The Agency holds ongoing continual
improvement meetings and plans to continue and expand upon its initiative.
Characteristics of Effective Process Improvement Efforts
Experience from state agencies suggests that several factors are common to successful Lean and Six
Sigma efforts. These include:
D Secure top management buy-in and support;
D Articulate boundary conditions early (e.g., the focus is on administrative process waste, not
environmental standards);
° Scale project scope appropriately to avoid taking on too much at one time;
° Collect sufficient data to understand how the process is really working;
D Engage staff during all stages of planning and implementation;
° Consider involving external stakeholders in improvement events, as they often bring fresh
perspectives;
° Be transparent—communicate project progress to staff and external stakeholders; and
° Follow through with periodic meetings to sustain improvement results.
Sustained organizational commitment is critical to the long-term success of process improvement efforts.
Despite the quick and impressive results that typically flow from Lean efforts, agency managers are likely
to experience internal skepticism and resistance from some staff, especially initially. State agencies have
used a variety of communications strategies and tactics to mitigate employee concerns. With the support
of senior management, strong performance improvements are possible quickly with Lean and Six Sigma,
and lead to broadened organizational support and momentum for future efforts. While external technical
assistance can be highly useful for getting initiatives started, building internal staff capacity to guide and
implement ongoing process improvement is important to long-term success and culture change.
Future Efforts and Next Steps
All the States profiled in this primer plan to continue with Lean and/or Six Sigma implementation to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their processes. In several cases, the agencies are making
significant organizational commitments in training and staff time to foster broader adoption of process-
improvement techniques and agency-wide culture change. Future collaborative efforts around Lean and
Six Sigma at environmental agencies—such as information and experience sharing, development and
dissemination of problem-solving techniques, training and agency capacity-building assistance, and joint
improvement projects—could facilitate increased adoption and diffusion of process-improvement
methods. Lean and Six Sigma methods offer powerful new approaches to help environmental agencies to
work more effectively, address stakeholder concerns, and achieve better environmental outcomes.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — i
-------
1. Introduction
Since 2003, state environmental agencies have achieved impressive results with improvements to their
permitting programs and other processes. This primer is designed to share the implementation
experiences and results of five States that have used Lean, Six Sigma, and similar business process
improvement methods to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of agency processes.
Typical Results from State Process Improvement Efforts
Process improvement efforts in at least five States—Delaware, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and
Nebraska—have dramatically reduced permitting backlogs and issuance timeframes, while also
improving quality. In all cases, the improvement activities focused on administrative process steps, fully
preserving and protecting environmental outcomes, standards, and policies. Typical results include:
D Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) decreased the time needed to process
major air construction permits from 422 days to 98 days. Quality improved, with initial
application administrative completeness rising from 82 to 95 percent.
° Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) lowered a
backlog of air construction permits from 199 to 25, while reducing the average permit processing
time to less than 76 days.
D Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) reduced the average time to issue standard air
quality construction permits from 62 days to 6 days (an 90 percent reduction), and they
eliminated 70 percent of the process steps (from 23 to 7 steps). A backlog of nearly 600 permits
was cut in half in the first three months after the process improvements were implemented.
° Iowa DNR streamlined the corrective action process activities in the Leaking Underground
Storage Tank (LUST) program, reducing the number of decisions by 80 percent and the total
number of process steps from 43 to 26 (a 40 percent reduction). This dropped the average
decision-making timeframe in the program from 38 months to 3 months.
States achieved these results by adapting and applying process improvement approaches and methods
commonly used in business and industry—Lean and Six Sigma.
Questions Addressed in This Primer
This primer answers the following questions:
° What are Lean and Six Sigma, and how do these methods apply to government? (See Section 2
of this primer.)
° How and why have state environmental agencies used these methods to improve their processes?
(See Section 3.)
D What results have these States achieved? (See Section 3.)
° What lessons have these States learned from their efforts? (See Section 4 and Appendix C.)
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 1
-------
What opportunities are there for future collaboration and next steps to promote and facilitate
process improvement efforts at environmental agencies? (See Section 5.)
Where can you go for more information? (See Appendices A-D.)
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 2
-------
2. Lean and Six Sigma for Government
This section describes recent trends in state environmental agency process improvement initiatives,
highlighting several common characteristics of these efforts and describing the main approaches and
methods these agencies have employed.
Trends in Environmental Agency Process Improvement
Over the past several years, several state environmental agencies have experimented with process
improvement methods adapted from business and industry, such as Lean and Six Sigma. While the exact
methods used by these state agencies have varied, these improvement initiatives share several common
elements that, when combined, differentiate them from past improvement efforts.
Common Elements of State Environmental Agency Process Improvement Efforts
Most of the recent state environmental agency process improvement initiatives:
° Take a "customer service " perspective that seeks to optimize value delivered to the environment,
the public, and the regulated community;
D Involve employees and external stakeholders in continual improvements and problem-solving
activities;
° Deploy a rapid continuous improvement framework that emphasizes implementation over
prolonged planning;
° Seek to reduce the complexity of processes and the variation in process outputs;
° Use metrics and visual controls to provide rapid feedback to improve real-time decision-making
and problem-solving; and
° Approach improvement activities from a systems perspective.
These process improvement initiatives typically focus on identifying and eliminating non-value added
activity (waste). In the context of environmental agencies, most processes—ranging from air construction
permitting to travel authorization—accumulate steps, approvals, and activities over time. For example,
some permitting processes have been found to have more than 20 approvals steps, with very few adding
any value to the permitting process. This occurs as new staff assume process responsibilities and make
adjustments, as well as when the process is adjusted to
address new needs and circumstances. State agencies have I Box1- Common Permittina
found that processes are almost always more complex than process Wastes
people think they are.
Lean and Six Sigma are process improvement methods
Errors in applications
Incomplete applications
designed to help an organization see how its processes are n Backlogs
really working and to equip the organization to design and ° Approval bottlenecks
implement its processes more intentionally—tightly focusing ° Redundant review or data entry
on achieving desired outcomes. Lean and Six Sigma both D Unnecessary rework on permits
help make "waste" in processes visible so that it can be
reduced or eliminated. Common administrative wastes in
.... r * j • r> i iir * - Lack of templates
agency permitting processes are listed in Box 1. Waste can M
Unbalanced allocation of work
Poor visibility to permit status
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 3
-------
Box 2: Seven "Deadly" Process be found in almost any administrative process, from
Wastes permitting to human resources. Box 2 lists the seven
"deadly" wastes that are commonly identified in processes.
1. Production of defects Case studies of administrative processes in the private and
2. Overproduction ahead of demand public sector have found that work that adds no value to
3. Unnecessary transport of desired outcomes typically comprises more than 50 percent
materials of total service or process costs, leaving substantial room for
4. Waiting for the next process step improvement1
5. Inventories (excess material and
The process improvement approaches being used by state
Unnecessary movement by
employees
Over-processing
agencies typically target three dimensions: increasing speed,
reducing complexity, and improving quality. Quality may
relate to the frequency of errors in documents, the
completeness of permit applications, and/or the consistency
of permit language used for similar situations. Although more difficult to measure, States are also
examining the effectiveness of process improvement efforts in achieving outcomes such as environmental
quality and enhanced public involvement. In short, process improvement efforts are about working
smarter, not just working faster.
Key Drivers for Process Improvement BQX 3; Key Drjvers
A range of drivers has prompted state environmental
agencies to experiment with Lean and Six Sigma methods.
In at least four of the States interviewed for this primer,
growing external pressure for reducing air construction
Industry Success with Lean and
Six Sigma
Legislative Oversight
permitting backlogs and approval timeframes raised the need ° Regulated Community Pressure
for process changes. Complaints and encouragement from " -°P..ea erf 'P ,^CIS'°" ,,
., , . j .. , <_ • •_„.•? ° Funding and Workload Challenges
the regulated community about air permitting have
highlighted the need to better align permitting timeframes
with the rapid operational change timeframes that are needed for competitiveness in many sectors.
Several other factors have contributed to States' interest in launching process improvement initiatives:
D New environmental protection priorities are highlighting the need for existing processes to be as
efficient as possible to free agency attention and resources for other activities;
D Shrinking federal and state budgets for environmental agencies increasingly means fewer
resources are available for core programs and service delivery;
° Witnessing impressive process improvement results in another State's environmental agency has
prompted some States to launch similar improvement initiatives; and
° Occasionally new commissioners or senior managers, particularly those who have worked in the
private sector, are familiar with the powerful results that Lean and Six Sigma methods can yield.
Lean and Six Sigma Process Improvement Methods
Lean and Six Sigma are the two main process improvement approaches that the five state environmental
agencies involved in preparing this primer have drawn on in their process improvement initiatives. In
each case, however, the agencies have adapted these methods to meet their specific needs. Four of the
States have focused on the use of Lean improvement methods, while Minnesota has pioneered the use of
1 Michael George, Lean Six Sigma for Service: How to Use Lean Speed & Six Sigma Quality to Improve Services and
Transactions, (New York: McGraw Hill, 2003) 3.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 4
-------
Six Sigma in the state agency context. Some agencies, such as Iowa's Department of Natural Resources,
are moving towards a process improvement approach that incorporates aspects from both Lean and Six
Sigma (typically referred to as Lean Six Sigma or Lean Sigma), echoing a trend in business.
What is Lean?
Lean2 refers to a collection of principles and methods that
focus on the systematic identification and elimination of non-
value added activity (waste) involved in producing a product
or delivering a service to customers. Two common methods
used in Lean are value stream mapping and kaizen rapid
process improvement events.
Value Stream Mapping (VSM). Value stream mapping
refers to the activity of developing a visual representation of
the flow of processes, from start to finish, involved in
delivering a desired outcome, service, or product (a "value
stream") that is valued by customers. In the context of
environmental agencies, a value stream could be the process
of permitting the air emissions of a certain type of stationary
source, approving a brownfield site for redevelopment, or
hiring new agency staff. VSM examines information flows
and systems, as well as the flow of the product or service
product (e.g., permit) through an agency's processes. VSM
can increase understanding of actual decision-making
processes and identify sources of non-value added time (e.g.,
documents waiting to be reviewed). The typical products of
a 2-5 day VSM workshop are two maps—a map of the
"current state" of targeted processes and a "future state" map
of the desired process flow—and an associated
implementation plan for future process improvement
activities.
Kaizen Events. Kaizen is a combination of two Japanese
words that mean "to take apart" and "to make good." Kaizen
refers to an approach to continuous improvement that is
founded on the belief that small, incremental changes
routinely applied and sustained over a long period result in
significant performance improvements. Kaizen focuses on
eliminating waste in a targeted system or process of an
organization, improving productivity, and achieving
sustained improvement. Kaizen activity is often focused in the
(sometimes called a kaizen blitz), which bring together a cross-:
study a process and begin implementation of process changes
Box 4: Comparing Lean and Six
Sigma
Lean:
° Focuses on maximizing product
flow and velocity
° Provides tools for analyzing
process flow and delays at each
process step
° Centers on the separation of
"value-added" from "non-value
added" work with tools to eliminate
root causes of non-value added
activities
° Provides a means for quantifying
and eliminating the cost of
complexity
Six Sigma:
° Emphasizes the need to recognize
opportunities and eliminate
defects
° Recognizes that variation hinders
the ability to reliably deliver high-
quality services
° Requires data-driven decisions
and incorporates a comprehensive
set of quality tools under a
systematic framework for problem
solving
° Provides a highly prescriptive
cultural infrastructure effective in
obtaining sustainable results
Source: Michael George, Lean Six Sigma for
Service: How to Use Lean Speed & Six Sigma
Quality to Improve Services and Transactions,
| (New York: McGraw Hill, 2003) 7.
form of rapid improvement events
functional team for two to five days to
2 James Womack, Daniel Jones, and Daniel Roos coined the term "Lean" in their 1990 book The Machine that Changed the
World to describe the manufacturing paradigm (often referred to as the Toyota Production System) developed by the Toyota
Motor Company based on principles pioneered by Henry Ford.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 5
-------
What is Six Sigma?
Six Sigma3 is a rigorous methodology that utilizes information (management by facts) and statistical
analysis to measure and improve an organization's performance, practices, and systems. The fundamental
objective of Six Sigma is the implementation of a measurement-based approach that focuses on process
improvement and variation reduction through the application of Six Sigma improvement projects. In the
context of state agency processes, unnecessary variation in how a process is implemented can result in
significant delays and poor quality of decisions and outputs, such as permits. The Six Sigma DMAIC
(Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) method is a system for improving existing processes that
fall below specifications. Like Lean, Six Sigma focuses on identifying and implementing steps that foster
continual, incremental improvement. Six Sigma can also be used to develop new processes, services, or
products at Six Sigma-quality levels (often referred to as "Design for Six Sigma").
Six Sigma is typically executed by trained personnel (often referred to as "green belts" and "black belts")
who have experience with multiple performance measurement and statistical analysis techniques.
Adapting Lean and Six Sigma for Government
While Lean and Six Sigma process improvement approaches were developed originally for use in the
private sector to target manufacturing processes, there has been steady progress towards adapting these
approaches for use on service and administrative processes. Public sector interest in Lean and Six Sigma
appears to be increasing rapidly, fueled by strong improvement results. Government organizations
ranging from the Connecticut Department of Labor to the City of Fort Wayne, Indiana to the U.S. Mint to
all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces are using Lean and/or Six Sigma to improve their administrative
processes. Based in part on Lean successes at Iowa DNR, Governor Tom Vilsack is championing the
application of Lean Six Sigma methods throughout Iowa State government.
Differences between Public and Private Sector Methods
There are a few important differences between how Lean and Six Sigma methods are applied at public
environmental agencies and in the private sector.
D Definitions and Language. Lean terms used in the private sector context may need to be dropped
or redefined. For example, companies implementing Lean often talk about the "customer." The
concept of "customer" is more complicated in the public sector, with the regulated community,
environmental interest groups, and the public all having specific needs and desired outcomes.
D Event/Project Scoping and Expectations. Application of Lean and Six Sigma in the public
sector can also necessitate more careful project scoping and setting of boundary conditions to
ensure that process changes do not adversely affect the overall public interest. Sections later in
this primer discuss steps that States have taken to effectively scope their improvement efforts.
State environmental agencies have successfully built upon past improvement efforts to incorporate and
adapt the innovative approaches of Lean and Six Sigma. The next section discusses the range of process
improvement experiences of five state environmental agencies.
3 Six Sigma methods were first developed by Motorola and Allied Signal, and were refined and popularized by General Electric
in the mid-1990s.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 6
-------
3. State Environmental Agency Lean and Six Sigma
Initiatives
This section describes some of the main similarities and differences in the Lean and Six Sigma efforts of
five state environmental agencies—the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental
Control (DNREC), the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR), the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA), and the Nebraska DEQ.
This section begins with a brief overview of each State's process improvement initiative, and then
compares the implementation experience of all five state agencies.
Overview of State Process Improvement Efforts
Although in many cases they have targeted similar processes, the five state agencies profiled in this
primer have used a range of Lean and Six Sigma methods and different implementation approaches to
improve their agency processes. Some of the agencies are several years into their Lean and Six Sigma
improvement efforts, while others had conducted only one event or project as of summer 2006. The
process improvements efforts at the five state agencies include the following:
° Delaware DNREC used value stream mapping to improve its air construction permitting process
in 2005, and plans to apply value stream mapping to five more processes starting in fall 2006.
° Iowa DNR has conducted 17 kaizen events on a wide range of agency processes, starting with air
construction permitting in 2003 and Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) corrective
action reporting and implementation in 2004. The Agency has also used the design for Lean Six
Sigma method to design a new product (agency magazine).
D Michigan DEQ applied value stream mapping to the Air Quality Division's permit to install
application review process at a workshop in 2004, to a land and water management permitting
process in 2005, and to an administrative process.
D Minnesota PCA has initiated 21 Six Sigma improvement projects, addressing both regulatory
and non-regulatory processes at the Agency. The first two projects—a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater permitting project in 2003 and an air
construction permitting project in 2004—occurred in conjunction with a Six Sigma training
program administered by the University of Minnesota.
° Nebraska DEQ conducted a kaizen event on construction air permitting in 2005, as well as a
post-kaizen workshop for new staff seven months afterwards, and has continued to implement the
recommendations from the event in 2006.
Table 1 below and the State summaries in Appendix C of this primer provide more information about
these initiatives. Each State summary describes the scope of process improvement activities, the Lean
and Six Sigma methods used, the key drivers for project initiation, the role of stakeholders and assistance
providers, and the results from the improvement efforts.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 7
-------
Table 1: State Environmental Agency Process Improvement Initiatives
State
Agency
Delaware
DNREC
Iowa DNR
Michigan
DEQ
Minnesota
PCA
Nebraska
DEQ
Year
Started
2005
2003
2004
2003
2005
Number of
Projects/Events*
1, plus 5 in
planning stage
17
2
21
1 , plus a follow-up
workshop
Primary
Methods Used
Value Stream
Mapping
Kaizen Events
Value Stream
Mapping
Six Sigma
Kaizen Event
Type of Technical
Assistance
Manufacturing
Extension
Partnership Center
Private consultant
Industry Consultant
University
Management School
Industry and
Government
Representatives
Processes
Targeted
Construction
air permitting
Various — air,
water, cleanup,
land
acquisition, and
internal
administrative
processes
Construction
air permitting
Various — air,
water, cleanup,
and internal
administrative
processes
Construction
air permitting
* Projects conducted as of summer 2006.
Project Initiation
As mentioned in section 2, there are a number of compelling reasons why government agencies might
choose to use Lean, Six Sigma, and similar process improvement methods to reduce the total lead time for
processes, eliminate non-value added process steps, improve the consistency and quality of permits and
other outputs, and respond to customer needs.
Why did States begin their process improvement efforts?
The five States profiled in this primer identified both external pressure and top agency leadership support
as the impetus behind their process improvement efforts. Industry, Governors, and State legislatures
recommended process efficiency improvements, and top
leadership supported the efforts in light of funding
constraints, external complaints, and backlogs of work. The
initial success with Lean and Six Sigma then generated
momentum for further process improvement efforts.
Box 5: Criteria for Project and
Process Selection
How did States decide which processes to target
for improvement?
For the most part, States initially focused their process
improvement efforts on processes with the most "pain" or
the greatest perceived problems. In particular, the States
Funding Concerns
High Volume and/or Criticality
Number of Customer Complaints
Productivity Problems
Backlogs
Administrative Bottlenecks
Existence of a Project "Champion"
Staff Willingness and Energy
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 8
-------
targeted high-volume agency processes, such as air construction permitting and NPDES permitting that
had significant issues regarding industry complaints, permit backlogs, funding challenges, and staff
frustration. After establishing their process improvement efforts, however, some States are now looking
more systematically at project selection. Iowa, for example, is considering using the value stream
mapping method to prioritize and think strategically about future improvement projects across the
Agency. Delaware solicited proposals for future Lean projects from Divisions within the Agency and is
using an interview process to identify which projects are likely to be most successful.
Implementation Approaches
Within the overall framework of Lean and/or Six Sigma, state agencies have used a range of
implementation approaches to achieve process improvements. As in the private sector, States have
adapted the methods and deployment options to fit with agency culture and organizational needs. For
example, Minnesota decided to take a "slow growth" approach that would build in-house expertise and
capacity for Six Sigma implementation from the beginning, rather than using outside technical experts. In
addition, several States have designed communications strategies and set boundary conditions for Lean
events to alleviate concerns about the effects of process changes on environmental protection. (These
specific strategies are discussed further in Appendix C.)
What implementation approaches have States used?
Based on their intensity and duration, the state process improvement efforts discussed in this primer can
be divided into two main models:
1. Event-based projects involve the rapid identification, selection, and implementation of
process changes during a focused time period. These 2-5 day Lean events involve a team of
agency staff and stakeholders, and often use an external facilitator.
2. Extended analytic improvement projects rely on thorough analysis of process data to
determine the causes of problems and involve identifying and implementing process changes
over an extended time period. Trained Six Sigma "black belts" typically lead these projects.
As mentioned earlier in the primer, the five States have used three main methods: kaizen events, value
stream mapping, and Six Sigma process analysis. The choice of method was largely driven by how the
Agency's process improvement effort began—in most cases an agency Commissioner or business group
recommended a particular method to the Agency.
Process Improvements and Results
The five States profiled in this primer have used the
principles and methods of Lean and Six Sigma to make
significant changes in the way they do business, and this has
yielded dramatic results, often within short time frames and
for relatively little upfront investment in resources.
How have States improved their processes?
While each State has its own processes, people, and
procedures, no organization is unique in having non-value
added activity ingrained in its processes. The five States
Box 6: Common Metrics Used for
State Lean and Six Sigma Projects
° Number of Process Steps
° Total Lead Time
° Cycle Time
° Number of Applications Submitted
that are Complete
° Number of Handoffs
° Amount of Backlog
° Rework Percentage (Percent of
Permits Needing Rework)
° Number of Staff Committed to
Process Improvement
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 9
-------
have eliminated non-value added time and other wastes by using strategies and techniques such as the
following:
D Eliminating unnecessary process steps;
D Involving customers in the solutions to problems, through techniques such as check-in calls,
permit hotlines, and clearer instructions to improve information flows around permit applications;
° Developing processes for screening and prioritizing incoming permit applications;
D Creating alternatives such as "fast track" or "just in time" permitting under certain conditions;
D Developing and using templates and boilerplate language for permit writers;
° Changing the office layout and organization to improve process flow; and
D Instituting improved permit or process tracking systems, including on-line and visual tracking
systems.
More examples of process improvements are included in Appendix D (State Summaries).
What results have the States seen?
As mentioned earlier in the primer, one of the reasons that there has been so much excitement and energy
around using Lean and Six Sigma methods at state environmental agencies is the dramatic successes these
efforts have yielded. Collectively, the States have:
° Reduced the total lead times for permitting processes by more than 50 percent without reducing
the value-added time for substantive review of permit applications;
° Reduced or eliminated permit backlogs within a few months of implementation;
° Made more staff time available for "mission critical" work;
D Improved consistency of permits and decreased the variability of processing times;
D Improved customer satisfaction as measured by reductions in the frequency and magnitude of
complaints; and
D Improved staff morale within the processes that have implemented process improvement projects.
Although the overwhelming experience of the States has been positive, there have been a couple of
projects that state managers have felt were unsuccessful. These projects present opportunities for
learning, however, and are discussed further in the next section with regards to the critical elements of
process improvement efforts.
Organizational Deployment and Diffusion
The state environmental agencies profiled in this primer recommend comprehensive diffusion of process-
improvement approaches within an agency, at a pace appropriate to the agency's culture. Long-term
project success depends on the allocation of agency resources for training and staff time to support
process improvement efforts agency-wide.
Where are the States heading with Lean and Six Sigma deployment?
Most of the States are in a "piloting" phase of their Lean and Six Sigma efforts, having conducted only
one or two projects thus far. While most States began with an air construction permitting project, several
States are in the planning stages, or have already initiated, broader Lean Six Sigma deployment within
their agencies. For example, both Iowa and Minnesota have conducted over a dozen projects, ranging
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 10
-------
from land acquisition, landfill permitting, and feedlot inspections, to a number of administrative
processes, and continue to plan future agency-wide projects. Similarly, Delaware is planning five future
projects following their initial success with the air construction permitting project.
A couple of the state agencies—Iowa DNR and Minnesota PCA—have also looked at broader, Agency-
wide strategies for increasing the diffusion of process improvement methods, fostering culture change
across the Agency, and sustaining early process gains. These efforts have included hiring or assigning
staff to serve as Lean Six Sigma facilitators or black belts, training agency leadership and management,
and placing a renewed focus on follow-up activities.
What are these States' future Lean Six Sigma plans?
Although each State is in a different stage of project implementation and specific future plans differ, a
number of common goals exist, including:
D Continuing implementation of identified project goals;
D Building greater in-house organizational expertise and facilitation capacity;
° Holding regular project follow-up meetings to address implementation status; and
° Developing employee surveys to measure culture changes and evaluate internal project success
among staff.
Overall, the States profiled in this primer have used different implementation approaches for their Lean
and Six Sigma process improvement efforts in terms of the improvement methods, technical assistance,
length of projects, and the extent of agency-wide deployment. Despite these differences, there is a
remarkable amount in common across the States—including drivers for improvement initiatives, the types
of process changes made, and the impressive results the States have seen. The next section discusses
some of the key lessons States have learned from these varied, but parallel implementation experiences.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 11
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 12
-------
4. Lessons Learned About Lean and Six Sigma in
Government
In preparing this primer, representatives from the five state environmental agencies reflected on the key
factors and lessons that have contributed to their process improvement successes. Several of the States
also identified instances where particular Lean events or Six Sigma projects fell short of meeting their
expectations. In most cases, the States have found these "failures" to be important learning experiences
that have helped them strengthen their Lean and Six Sigma efforts. This section describes several key
considerations for project design and implementation that can lead to better results. The section also
describes a few overarching lessons that these States have identified through their efforts.
Key Considerations for Project Design and Implementation
The state agencies profiled in this primer identified the following key considerations for process
improvement design and implementation success. (See Appendices B and C for additional information
and examples related to these considerations.)
Top Management Support: Active support and
engagement of senior management is crucial to
achieving project success and to building continual
improvement and innovation into the agency.
Boundary Conditions: Clear boundary conditions
on what process changes are out of scope must be set
to ensure that agency objectives, such as
environmental protection, are not undermined.
Project Scope: Determining the appropriate scale
and scope of individual Lean and Six Sigma projects
is important to ensuring their success. In particular,
managers should consider the breadth and
complexity of processes and be realistic about how
much of the process to target initially.
Data Collection: Routinely collecting, compiling,
and communicating data on the performance of key
aspects of a process—including data not typically collected by environmental agencies—is an
important aspect of Lean and Six Sigma implementation.
Participant Selection: Carefully selecting external stakeholders and agency staff for participation
in Lean events promotes future coordination, communication, and implementation of process
changes.
Communication Strategies: Proactively communicating, building transparency, and
coordinating a communication strategy is critical to building organizational buy-in to process
improvement efforts.
Box 7: Key Success Factors
° Secure Top Management Buy-in
and Support
° Articulate Boundary Conditions
Early
° Scale Project Scope Appropriately
° Engage Staff During All Stages of
Planning and Implementation
° Communicate Project Progress to
Staff
° Communicate with Regulated
Community
° Be Transparent
° Conduct Project Follow-up
Meetings
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 13
-------
Strategies for Ensuring Follow Through: Developing explicit strategies to sustain the
effectiveness of process changes and resolving action items identified during events or projects
will help ensure that momentum doesn't wane once employees leave an event.
Box 8: Overcoming Staff Resistance to Lean and Six Sigma
Agency managers implementing Lean or Six Sigma are likely to experience skepticism and resistance
from some staff. Below are common staff objections and brief descriptions of how some States have
addressed them:
"We've already tried that." Many agencies have conducted successful and unsuccessful
process improvement efforts over the past decade. Lean and Six Sigma have several
attributes that make them considerably different from past improvement efforts. First, Lean
has a strong bias towards implementation over prolonged planning, enabling lean events to
deliver compelling results quickly. Second, Lean and Six Sigma incorporate many best
practices from past improvement approaches such as Total Quality Management (TQM).
Third, broad-based acceptance of Lean and Six Sigma in the business community can
sharpen support and commitment for sustained success.
"The focus on streamlining processes may erode environmental protections." Lean
and Six Sigma efforts often generate significant improvements in the speed and flow of a
process. By setting explicit scoping and boundary criteria for improvement events, agencies
can ensure that process changes do not adversely affect decisions or desired outcomes. In
fact, the public interest can be well served by improving the quality of permits and other
process outputs and by freeing staff to focus on ways to better achieve desired environmental
and public involvement goals.
"We don't have time to focus on process improvement." This is precisely why it is
important to build continual improvement efforts into an agency. The goal and focus of Lean
and Six Sigma are to help an organization work smarter, freeing time to focus on value added
activities, rather than tedious activities that do not contribute to desired process outcomes.
Proactive communication to staff and stakeholders around these themes can mitigate skepticism and
resistance. (Appendix B of this primer contains an example Questions and Answers document that
Iowa DNR used for its initial kaizen events.) The momentum generated by compelling results from
pilot process improvement efforts, however, offers the best mechanism for addressing concerns.
Summary of Lessons Learned
In summary, discussions with and among the five States who participated in developing this primer
revealed the following overarching findings and lessons.
1. State environmental agencies are successfully using Lean and Six Sigma improvement
methods to streamline regulatory and non-regulatory processes.
2. These efforts have yielded impressive results in reducing processing time while maintaining
or enhancing levels of environmental protection and public involvement.
3. Lean and Six Sigma efforts eliminate unnecessary and non-valued added process steps that
have built up over time. This enables staff to focus on what is important for good decision-
making.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 14
-------
4. The successful use of Lean and Six Sigma process improvement methods by multiple state
environmental agencies means these approaches may have broad applicability to help
agencies achieve environmental outcomes more efficiently and effectively.
5. Sustained organizational commitment is critical to success; when this occurs, strong
performance improvements are possible very quickly and lead to broadened organizational
support and momentum for additional process improvement throughout an agency.
Lean and Six Sigma methods offer some powerful tools for public environmental agencies to improve a
broad range of agency processes. Success, however, is not given—it requires organizational leadership
and commitment along with consideration of several other key factors discussed above. The experience
of these five States provides insights into how to effectively address challenges and make sure process
improvements are sustained. The final section of this primer looks at possible opportunities for future
collaboration among environmental agencies to further support process improvement efforts.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 15
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 16
-------
5. Future Directions and Next Steps
Interest in the use of Lean and Six Sigma process improvement methods is on the rise among public
environmental agencies.
D The five state environmental agencies involved in developing this primer—Delaware, Iowa,
Michigan, Minnesota, and Nebraska—plan to continue and expand their Lean and Six Sigma
process improvement efforts.
° Other state environmental agencies, such as Vermont and Virginia, are embarking on their own
process improvement efforts, drawing on Lean and/or Six Sigma methods.
° Additional state environmental agencies and Program Offices within the U.S. EPA have
expressed interest in these process improvement methods and may consider whether to use them
in their organizations.
In light of this growing interest, the five States involved in the development of this primer identified the
important need to continue and expand state-to-state and state-EPA collaboration on the use of Lean and
Six Sigma process improvement methods. Several potential areas for future collaboration include:
D Information and Experience Sharing. Forums should be continued and expanded for sharing
information on experiences and lessons learned at both the commissioner and staff levels.
Periodic conference calls, meetings, or forums can be used to facilitate information sharing.
° Tool and Resource Development. Updating and expanding this primer with new information
and state experience could ensure that this resource remains relevant. Documentation of detailed,
process-specific information, such as strategies, improvement techniques, performance metrics,
and lessons, could help States benefit from each others' experience. In addition, template
documents, such as the Questions and Answers document in Appendix B, and other tools, such as
questions for prioritizing and selecting improvement events, could be developed and shared.
D Capacity Building. Efforts to support guest participation in environmental agencies' Lean and
Six Sigma improvement events can open opportunities for States and the EPA to learn from each
other first-hand, while transferring improvement and innovation ideas. The development of a
training program on the use of Lean and Six Sigma in environmental agencies may be worth
exploring, potentially in partnership with the National Institute of Standards and Technology's
Manufacturing Extension Partnership or the Lean Enterprise Institute.
° Joint Improvement Projects. Lean and Six Sigma methods could be used to improve processes
that involve multiple States or the States and EPA. Shared processes ranging from the Clean Air
Act State Implementation Plan review and approval process to the development of State-EPA
Performance Partnership Agreements may benefit from targeted improvement efforts.
State environmental agencies have found that Lean and Six Sigma process improvement methods enable
them to work smarter for environmental protection, eliminating unnecessary variation and non-value
added activities, while advancing the missions of their agencies. Future collaborative efforts to share
experiences, develop resources, and implement joint improvement projects may yield even greater gains
in the performance and outcomes of agency processes.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 17
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 18
-------
Appendices
Appendix A: Resources
Appendix B: Sample Question and Answer Document for Kaizen Event
Appendix C: Additional Information about State Lean and Six Sigma Implementation
Experience
Appendix D: State Summaries
Delaware Lean Process Improvement Initiative
Iowa Lean Six Sigma Business Process Improvement initiative
Michigan Lean Process Improvement Initiative
Minnesota Six Sigma Process Improvement Initiative
Nebraska Business Process Improvement Initiative
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 19
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 20
-------
Appendix A: Resources
Books on Lean and Six Sigma Methods for Office and Administrative Processes
Fabrizio, Thomas and Don Tapping. 5Sfor the Office: Organizing the Workplace to Eliminate Waste.
New York: Productivity Press, 2006.
George, Michael. Lean Six Sigma for Service: How to Use Lean Speed & Six Sigma Quality to Improve
Services and Transactions. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003.
Keyte, Beau and Drew Locher. The Complete Lean Enterprise: Value Stream Mapping for
Administrative and Office Processes. New York: Productivity Press, 2004.
Tapping, Don and Tom Shuker. Value Stream Management for the Lean Office: Eight Steps to Planning,
Mapping, and Sustaining Lean Improvements in Administrative Areas. New York: Productivity
Press, 2003.
Books on Lean Thinking and Principles
Womack, James P. and Daniel T. Jones. Lean Solutions: How Companies and Customers Can Create
Value and Wealth Together. New York: Free Press, 2005.
Womack, James P. and Daniel T. Jones. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your
Corporation. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996.
Web Resources
Lean Enterprise Institute, http ://www. lean, org/. (LEI is a non-profit research and training organization
focused on value stream mapping and Lean principles.)
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Manufacturing Extension Partnership,
http://www.mep.nist.gov/. (NIST MEP Centers are non-profit Lean technical assistance providers.)
Productivity Press, http://www.productivitypress.com/. (Productivity Press is a private Lean publishing
company.)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Lean Manufacturing and the Environment Website,
http ://www. epa. gov/lean/index.htm. (This is an EPA webpage providing resources and information
on Lean and the environment for the private and public sector.)
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 21
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 22
-------
Appendix B: Sample Question and Answer
Document for Kaizen Events
This is a sample Q & A document distributed to Iowa Department of Natural Resources staff prior to a
kaizen business process improvement event.
1. Are we compromising environmental protection?
This is not about loosening environmental regulations or our agency's commitment to
environmental protection. We are looking for efficiencies in workflow, paper processing,
number of steps in our process, etc. In fact, our goals are to enhance our ability to protect the
environment by being able shift more time and resources on environmental protection
activities.
2. Will anyone lose his or her job by making this process so efficient?
Our people are very important and will continue to be part of this agency. Some people's job
duties may change, some may have different office locations or configurations. But all staff
will remain part of this agency.
3. Municipalities, consulting engineers, and other external entities slow down the
permitting process. How are they involved, and who will make them more efficient?
Two representatives from consulting engineering firms will take part in the event to help
identify opportunities and concerns, as well as two city representatives. However, this is not
about how other organizations conduct processes, which we cannot control. Rather, we are
focusing on what we can control, and that is how we move a permit through the approval
process.
4. What guarantees do we have that this will actually help the process?
Kaizen is a proven methodology used to break through barriers and cut through bureaucracy,
helping teams reach their goals.
5. Why are we doing this on [Event Name] ? Why not another issue?
First, [Event Name] meets the three criteria for undertaking a BPI event: it should be a large-
volume process; it should use the same steps every time; and it should be a core business
activity. Second, we see this issue as an integral step to improving the water quality in the
State.
6. Have we messed up? Have we done something wrong?
The DNR is proud of the professionalism and performance of this staff. Conducting a
process improvement event is a way to enhance that performance. The goal is to give people
the tools to do their jobs better. Each of us, in our own work areas, could benefit from that
type of assistance.
7. Is this a test of my job performance? Will I get in trouble for not doing well in my job?
BPI Events are performed under the assumption that everyone involved is already doing their
best—but that with some assistance, efforts can be altered to lessen steps, delays, and time,
with no loss of performance or quality. Improvements will focus on reducing the time that no
one is working on a project. The time it sits in someone's in-box or is waiting for a reply is
waste that can be reduced.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 23
-------
8. How can you expect to get meaningful change in one week?
These events are specifically engineered to achieve results in an intense, one-week work
session. Additionally, preparation has taken place prior to the actual event.
9. How can they understand something as complex as [Event Name] in a week?
The participants will learn the steps in the process, not how to conduct the process. The
process will be laid out in graphical form to make it easier to understand the sequence and
how steps are interrelated.
10. What will go on the week of the event? Where will the event participants be in the
building?
Event participants will be in the [Event Location]. The week's agenda looks like this:
Monday. Kaizen methodology training
Tuesday: Day of Discovery—establish the existing method of standard operations; analyze
the current process: time observations; create implementation plan
Wednesday. Day of Change (DO DAY)—eliminate wastes; brainstorm new ideas; share new
layout
Thursday. Day of Sustain—do, re-do, document results; implement new process; document
results and prepare for report out
Friday. Day of Celebration (Debrief)—report out: communication to management and to
staff
11. Who is involved and why?
The team that will be designing the new process is composed of [Team Members], other
DNR employees involved in the [Event Name], and some of the people who are impacted by
the process or who impact the process. All of these different viewpoints are important in
designing a better process.
12. Even if I'm not directly involved on the team, what will I need to do during that week?
You may be asked questions by the team members to clarify your part in the process. Please
take the time to answer their questions completely. Team members may also ask to observe
and time you while you complete a step in the process or discuss the time necessary to
complete a step.
13. Will people be in my office? Will they observe us talking about confidential issues,
sensitive operations, controversial issues, sensitive policy issue debates, and phone calls
that all occur each week?
The team is not interested in specific projects, but how the process works in general.
14. What happens if I have to leave during the week?
If you are a member of the team, please coordinate your absence with the team leader, [Team
Leader Name]. If you are not on the team, you only need to coordinate your absence with
your supervisor, as usual.
15. Will the recommendations be rigid or able to change in the future if they fail or cause
unintended consequences?
The team will not be making recommendation—they will design an improved process that
will be implemented immediately. The new process will be tested during the event, but if
adjustments need to be made later, they will be made.
16. How is this process to be judged a success or failure?
Data are being gathered on how well the process performs before the event and data will be
collected after the event for comparison.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 24
-------
Appendix C: Additional Information about State Lean
and Six Sigma Implementation Experience
This Appendix provides additional information about State Lean and Six Sigma implementation and key
considerations, which are more broadly addressed in Sections 3 and 4 of the primer. In particular, this
appendix outlines Lean Six Sigma implementation steps, improvement methods and technical assistance
providers States have used, as well as key considerations for project design and implementation.
What process improvement methods have States used?
The five States profiled in the primer have used three main methods: kaizen events, value stream
mapping, and Six Sigma process analysis. The choice of method was largely driven by how the Agency's
process improvement effort began—in most cases an agency commissioner or business group
recommended a particular method to the Agency. Kaizen events rely on rapid identification and
implementation of process changes, while Six Sigma workshops rely on a longer analytic process. More
details on the implementation steps are provided in Boxes 9 and 10.
Box 9: Lean Event Implementation Steps
Project Phases
° Planning/Preparation—Identify the mission,
vision, core values, objectives, and
methods/action steps
° Event—Map process, identify goals, and
implement new process
° Kaizen—Highly focused, action oriented,
2-5 day event in which an empowered
team takes immediate action to improve a
specific process
° Value Stream Mapping—Workshop held to
identify all steps, both value added and
non-value added, required to complete a
product or service from beginning to end
° Follow-up—Hold periodic follow-up meetings
to focus on continuous improvement
Box 10: Six Sigma Implementation Steps
Project Phases
° Define—Use data to understand what
users of the process need and expect
° Measure—Use data to understand how
the current process performs
° Analyze—Use data to test theories of
why a process under-performs and
determine root causes
° Improve/Design—Develop steps that
will consistently achieve improved
performance by focusing on root causes
° Control Validate—Develop measures
that make transparent whether the
improved process is performing up to the
project objective
In the context of the Lean and Six Sigma implementation, the States also used other specific Lean and Six
Sigma methods, including:
° Standard work (e.g., States developed standard boilerplate language for permit writers);
D Visual controls (e.g., States using a visual tracking board to monitor implementation efforts);
° 5S (e.g., using the 5S pillars of Sort, Set in order, Shine, Standardize, and Sustain to organize
offices and improve work flow);
D Root cause analysis (e.g., to identify the root causes of variation in permitting processing lead
time); and
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 25
-------
° Design for Lean Six Sigma (applying the principles of Lean and Six Sigma to design new
processes or products).
Thus far, the State agencies have focused primarily on process-level improvement projects, rather than
more overarching Lean and Six Sigma efforts that address multiple processes simultaneously. Delaware
and Michigan have used the value stream mapping tool to improve individual processes (e.g., air
construction permitting), rather than examining the full "value stream" for the Agency (e.g., a value
stream for a state environmental agency might include all the agency's permitting processes that apply to
a new facility in the state). Likewise, the kaizen events that Iowa and Nebraska have done and
Minnesota's Six Sigma projects have focused on process-level improvements. An improvement project
or event at the level of an agency's value stream, as the Iowa DNR is considering, might allow an agency
to prioritize improvement efforts across processes affecting multiple environmental media.
Box 11: Lean and Six Sigma Technical
Assistance Providers
What forms of technical assistance are
available?
Most of the States have received some outside
technical assistance or training to support their Lean I n Industry Representatives
and Six Sigma efforts, especially in the early stages. ° Manufacturing Extension Partnership
States have used a range of technical assistance (MEP) Centers
providers, including: private consultants that facilitate D Private Consulting Firms
University Business and Management
Schools
Lean events; non-profit State Manufacturing
Extension Partnership (MEP) Centers; and university-
based training programs. In addition, individual
businesses have also provided technical support to state agencies, by allowing agency staff to attend
industry trainings and providing for Lean facilitators. States are also working to build and maintain in-
house expertise to assist with Lean and Six Sigma deployment. Nebraska's kaizen event was facilitated
by an organizational behavior and development professor at the Agency and Iowa and Minnesota are
training staff to serve as black belts, green belts, and kaizen facilitators for their improvement efforts.
The Resource List in Appendix A outlines written materials and websites on Lean and Six Sigma
methods, particularly as they pertain to service organizations.
Key Considerations for Project Design and Implementation
The five state environmental agencies profiled in this primer identified the following key considerations
for process improvement design and implementation.
Top Management Support
All five States emphasized the importance of commissioner and top management support for successful
process improvement. Top management plays a vital role in communicating the importance of building
an organizational culture accepting of continual improvement and innovation. Additionally, top
management support is critical to overcoming middle management resistance, which has the potential to
thwart implementation through inertia. Managers can also help dispel employee concerns related to job
security, pubic involvement, and the potential for erosion of environmental protections (see discussion of
boundary conditions below). They can also strengthen commitment by discounting the idea that process
improvement efforts are only the "flavor of the month." Having senior management attend all or critical
portions of Lean events can be a useful way of demonstrating commitment to the efforts.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 26
-------
Several effective paths to securing top management support exist. In some cases, such as Minnesota, top
management may be the primary champion of Lean or Six Sigma and play an instrumental role in
bringing these process improvement methods into their agency. In other organizations, it may be
necessary to strengthen top management support over time by piloting improvement methods and
demonstrating results.
Boundary Conditions
Establishing and articulating clear boundary conditions for process improvement events and projects is
critical for focusing efforts and addressing potential stakeholder concerns. Boundary conditions define
what types of process changes are out of scope, as well as criteria that might be used to vet process
changes to ensure that they do not undermine key agency objectives, such as public involvement or
environmental protection. Common boundary conditions established by the five state environmental
agencies include:
D Process improvement must focus on agency administrative aspects of the process changes to
federal policy, and standards are off-limits;
D Environmental protection and outcomes should not be adversely impacted by process changes;
D Public involvement and transparency should not be adversely impacted by process changes;
° Public comment periods during permitting and other processes cannot be shortened; and
° Agency employees will not be laid off or dismissed as the result of process improvement efforts,
although their specific job responsibilities may shift.
Box 12: Boundary Conditions4
In Scope
Interpretation of agency rules, policies, and
guidance documents
Internal organizational structure
Internal permit process and timing
Applicant internal process and timing
Electronic submittals
Application content and format
Permit and technical memo format
Special condition content
Communication (internal/external)
Out of Scope
° EPA regulations
° Interpretation of EPA rules, policies, and
guidance documents
° Modifying existing agency rules
° Additional resources
° Permit appeal process
° New software/computer systems
° Mandated public participation requirements
° Permit involving enforcement action
° Public hearing process/officer
Project Scope
Determining the appropriate scope for a process improvement event or project is important for success. If
an event or project takes on too much, the breadth and complexity of the process can make it difficult to
identify and implement specific improvements. Minnesota, in particular, has scaled back the scope of its
Six Sigma projects (instead of trying to "boil the ocean," as one manager described) so that they could be
implemented more quickly and effectively. If an event or project is scoped too narrowly, process
improvements in one area can exacerbate problems in the broader process or system.
Several States identified value stream mapping as a useful tool for scoping future process improvement
efforts. A value stream map can help ensure that all improvement efforts, even if narrowly focused, are
' Example In Scope, Out of Scope from a presentation of Delaware DNREC.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 27
-------
aligned with the needs and desired future state for the full process or system. In addition, by identifying
process improvement as a continual, on-going process, pressures to bite off too much at once can be
reduced.
Data Collection
Collecting data on the performance of key aspects of a process is essential to identifying and
implementing improvements. Processes are often more complex and more laden with non-value added
activity than we imagine them to be. Data collection enables fact-based analysis that equips process
improvement teams to zero in on waste that would otherwise remain hidden. Pre-event or project
planning should give careful consideration to what data are important to collect. For example, Iowa DNR
found that by measuring permitting timeframes from the date of initial facility inquiry (instead of from the
submittal of a complete air permit application) to the permit issuance date increased DNR attention to
improving outreach and services to sources in the pre-application phase.
Ongoing data collection to support routinely compiled key process metrics is also critical. Metrics focus
attention on sustaining process improvements over time—what gets measured gets managed.
Participant Selection
Careful selection of participants for involvement in
process improvement events and projects is also a key
to success. Most of the States indicated that external D Directly work on the process
stakeholder participants—from industry, other state or D Touch the process but do not work on it
federal agencies, or public interest organizations—can on a regular basis
Box 13: Team Composition
External stakeholders (i.e., those who
are directly impacted by the outcomes of
the process)
make significant contributions while helping to
communicate an agency's process improvement work
to external audiences. At least some employees who
perform the actual work in the targeted process must
be involved in an improvement event, for they have intimate knowledge of how the process currently
works and they often have numerous ideas for improvement opportunities. In most cases, improvement
teams should include staff from different levels in the organization, which can bring in different
perspectives on the targeted process. While involving skeptics of the process improvement effort can be
very useful (and help to nurture culture change), lack of sufficient commitment to the improvement effort
among participants can lead to outcomes falling short of initial expectations. In the worse case, poor
participant selection can set back broader organizational improvement efforts and culture change.
It is often helpful to involve one or more participants who are not intimately familiar with the current
process, as they can often infuse creative thinking and fresh perspectives into the effort.
Communication Strategies
Proactive communication is critical to building organizational buy-in to process improvement efforts.
Sustained and coordinated internal communication can also help build an organizational culture that is
highly receptive to continual improvement and innovation. Numerous communication approaches can be
used to inform employees about agency process improvement efforts and results, including:
D Updates and articles in agency newsletters and intranet websites;
D Fact sheets and communications documents;
D Internal meetings at all levels in the organization;
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 28
-------
° Talks and presentations by top management; and
° Participation in Lean event training sessions and report-out presentations.
Appendix B includes a Questions and Answers communications document that Iowa DNR has used to
communicate internally about its Lean Six Sigma efforts, particularly in the early stages of Iowa's Lean
Six Sigma implementation. This document directly takes on many questions and concerns that agency
employees are likely to have about the process improvement effort.
States indicated that transparency and a coordinated communication strategy for reaching external
stakeholders is also important, particularly when process improvement efforts have potential to affect or
benefit these stakeholders. Active involvement of some stakeholders in the actual improvement events
can assist with this. In addition, most of the five States have set up publicly-accessible web pages that
describe their process improvement efforts and report on results and key metrics.
Strategies for Ensuring Follow Through
Even though Lean has a bias towards moving rapidly
to implementation ideas, momentum can wane once
employees leave a Lean event. All five States
identified the need for explicit strategies to sustain the
effectiveness of process changes and to ensure that
action items identified during events or projects are
resolved. Helpful techniques can include dedicating
staff time and assigning clear responsibility for follow
through, as well as creating a schedule of follow-up
meetings to check on project status. For example,
Iowa DNR has collected process performance data
and prepared follow-up reports for kaizen events after
intervals of 30 days, 60 days, 90 days, and six months
following the events. As mentioned above, key
process metrics can also be useful for sustaining
attention and ensuring follow through.
Several of the States are committed to improving the
extent to which they measure and evaluate the success
of their process improvement efforts. Future
evaluation efforts will likely focus on continuing the
follow up on processes that were changed (e.g., doing
more frequent follow-up reports), measuring the
extent to which agency culture is changing (through
surveys of employee awareness of Lean and Six
Sigma efforts and staff perceptions about their work),
and collecting additional data to measure other types
of results from projects (e.g., customer service and
quality metrics). State managers recognize the
importance of measuring environmental outcomes,
such as changes in air or water quality, but have
struggled with reliably linking environmental quality
data to changes in agency processes.
Box 14: Characteristics of Lean Six
Sigma Deployment Models
Agency Wide (traditional model)
° Top down driven
° Comprehensive
° Major culture change
° Rapid, highly visible deployment
Division/Department Unit (scalable model)
° Division leadership with Agency
management support
° Department pilot for Agency
° Comprehensive at the department level
° Culture change
Targeted (problem solving model)
° Top management leadership
° Focused on a few specific business
problems
° Driven by a desire for strategic impact
° Culture change not a deployment
objective
Grass Roots (bottom-up model)
° Originates at the bottom of the
organization
° Highly motivated individuals lead the
effort
° Project or problem specific
° Culture change not an objective
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 29
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 30
-------
Appendix D: State Summaries
The State summaries outline each State's specific experiences using Lean and Six Sigma. In particular,
the summaries address the process improvement activities, projection initiation and key drivers, external
involvement and technical assistance, results, and the future plans for each of the States representing the
Lean workgroup. The five States highlighted in the primer are listed below.
° Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
D Iowa Department of Natural Resources
D Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
D Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
° Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 31
-------
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 32
-------
Delaware Lean Process Improvement Initiative
State Agency: Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
Methods Implemented: Value Stream Mapping
The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) first used Value
Stream Mapping (VSM) in August 2005 to identify ways to make air construction permitting processes
more efficient. Michigan's success using VSM to improve a similar air permitting process served as a
model for Delaware's initiative. The Department's "Future state" VSM workshop goals focused on
improving permit processing times by significantly reducing rework and waiting periods and increasing
early communication with the permit applicant. The Delaware Economic Development Office, General
Motors, and other industry representatives provided technical assistance and guidance during all phases
of the VSM process improvement initiative. Success stemming from the air construction permitting VSM
workshop has led Delaware DNREC to expand its process improvement initiative—the Department is
currently in the planning stages for five additional VSM projects.
Process Improvement Activities
Process
Air Construction Permitting
Improvement Activities
Conducted a VSM workshop on
permitting (2005)
minor source air construction
Project Initiation and Key Drivers
The Delaware Economic Development Office, in conjunction with local industry representatives familiar
with Michigan's success using VSM, recommended that Delaware DNREC apply VSM tools to increase
efficiency in their permitting processes.
The Delaware Economic Development Office provided funding for a facilitator from the Delaware
Manufacturing Extension Partnership.
External Involvement and Technical Assistance
Industry Project Team
Industry representatives, primarily from the automotive and applied chemistry sectors, were part of the
project team and participated in the VSM workshop, permit redesign, and subsequent monthly project
review meetings.
Consultant/Facilitator
The Delaware Manufacturing Extension Partnership facilitated the workshop and is providing on-going
assistance to the DNREC.
Results
The Delaware DNREC Air Division has implemented a number of process changes as a result of the air
construction permitting VSM workshop, including:
D Developing new permit applications;
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 33
-------
° Installing visual permit tracking boards;
° Implementing a "First In, First Out" permitting system;
D Initiating pre-submittal application meetings; and
° Implementing administrative and technical completeness gates.
As a result of these process changes, Delaware DNREC Air Division has seen:
° Backlog reduced from 199 to 59 natural minor permits in three months and to 25 in one year;
D Natural minor air construction permits issued within 76 days of application submittal;
° Delaware DNREC staff time allocated more effectively to "mission critical" work;
° Rework reduced by 45 percent;
D Devotion of 1A FTE employees devoted to VSM efforts during project planning and
implementation stages;
D Improved communication with industry applicants;
D A process improvement culture integrated into the Division; and
° Staff gained ownership of the process, empowering them to identify and address improvement
opportunities.
Future Plans
° Delaware DNREC continues to implement VSM-identified goals for the minor source air
construction permitting process.
° Delaware DNREC is initiating the following three VSM workshops in September 2006:
Brownfields, underground storage tanks, and synthetic minor air construction permitting.
D The Department is also scoping two additional projects (wetlands permitting and storm water
Permitting) for process improvement using VSM tools.
For More Information
Delaware DNREC, VSM Process Improvement Initiative:
http://www.dnrec.state.de.us/DNREC2000/VSM/Index.htm
For additional information, contact:
Bob Zimmerman, Director of External Affairs
Office of the Secretary, Delaware DNREC
89 Kings Hwy, PO Box 1401
Dover, DE 19901
(302) 739-4403
Robert.Zimmerman@state.de.us
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 34
-------
Iowa Lean Six Sigma Business Process Improvement Initiative
State Agency: Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Methods Implemented: Kaizen Events, Value Stream Mapping, 5S, and Design for Lean Six Sigma
As part of a major commitment to increase efficiency and foster continuous improvement, the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has conducted sixteen Lean business process improvement
events since June 2003 using primarily kaizen events. Iowa DNR first targeted air quality construction
permitting and has since conducted events on processes such as Leaking Underground Storage Tank
(LUST) corrective action reporting and implementation, clean water construction permits, National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater permits, as well as a number of
administrative processes. Iowa DNR has achieved compelling results from its Lean Six Sigma Business
Process Improvement initiative, reducing most process lead times by more than half. The Department
received guidance and assistance in its Lean initiative from the Iowa Coalition for Innovation and Growth,
Lean consultants, and from a number of companies in Iowa that have significant Lean experience, such
as Pella Corporation, Rockwell Collins, and Vermeer Manufacturing.
Process Improvement Activities
Iowa DNR has conducted kaizen events on the following projects:
Legal service: administrative orders
(2005)
Magazine production (2005)
Manure management plans (2005)
NPDES wastewater permits (2004)
Sovereign lands permits: environmental
reviews (2004)
State revolving fund (SRF) cross-cutters
(2006)
Vehicle fleet management (2005)
° Air quality complex permitting (2004)
D Air quality new source construction
permits (2003)
D Animal feeding operations construction
permits (2005)
D Clean water construction project
permits (2004)
D Floodplain permits (2005)
D Land acquisition (2005)
° Landfill permits (2004)
D Leaking underground storage tank
(LUST) corrective action decisions
(2004)
In addition, Iowa DNR conducted a Design for Lean Six Sigma event on this project:
° Magazine redesign (2005)
Project Initiation and Key Drivers
The Iowa Coalition for Innovation and Growth's Business Process Hot Team approached the Iowa DNR
about cutting the lead time for air construction permits. The Coalition recommended that the Department
conduct a kaizen event. With the support of the Iowa Business Council, the Coalition also paid the initial
consultation fees for the kaizen event and assisted with the process.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 35
-------
External Involvement and Technical Assistance
Consultant/Facilitator
Iowa DNR uses Guidon Performance Solutions, a company that specializes in business process
improvement and has experience in the public sector.
Iowa Coalition for Innovation and Growth
The Coalition for Innovation and Growth's Business Process Hot Team represents Iowa's primary
industries, including Pella Corporation, Rockwell Collins, Alliant Energy, and Vermeer Manufacturing.
The Hot Team invited DNR staff to participate in industry kaizen events, and was instrumental in
initiating Iowa DNR's Lean Six Sigma efforts, as noted above. Coalition representatives continue to
participate in Iowa DNR's process improvement events.
Pella Corporation
A top Iowa business, the corporation chaired the Business Process Hot Team and offered on-going
support to the Iowa DNR following their first kaizen event.
Results
Iowa DNR has achieved compelling results from its Lean Six Sigma business process improvement
initiatives. The events have resulted in both organizational and cultural changes in the Department, as
well as specific process changes identified during the Lean Six Sigma events.
Department-Wide Results
Iowa DNR has conducted sixteen process improvement events, most of which have focused on reducing
lead times as shown in the table below.
Kaizen Event Projects
Air quality complex permit
Air quality new source construction
permit
Animal feeding operations
construction permits
Clean water construction project
permits
Floodplain permits
Landfill permits
Land acquisition: best case
Land acquisition: worst case
Leaking underground storage
tanks corrective action decision
Before Process Improvement
21 4 days
62 days
66 days
28 months
After Process Improvement
180 days
6 days
36 days
4.5 months
Implemented:
° Pre-design meeting and outreach strategy
° Database design
° Permit redesign
187 days
24 months
22 years
38 months
30 days
9 months
6.3 years
3 months
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 36
-------
Kaizen Event Projects
Legal services: administrative
orders
Manure management plans
NPDES wastewater permitting
Sovereign lands permits:
environmental reviews
SRF cross-cutters
Vehicle dispatch
Magazine production
Before Process Improvement
° Consent orders
° Unilateral orders
° Attorney General referrals
After Process Improvement
° 40-90% improvement in
° lead time reduction
° Incomplete submittals reduced by 50%
425 days
163 days
1 5 days
86 days
° Delays reduced by 40%
Steps reduced by 32%
Pool vehicles reassigned to Department of Administrative Services-
General Services Enterprise
Allows on-time quality production while meeting day-to-day
communication needs
One of these events focused on a new project and used Lean Six Sigma Design tools, as described below.
Lean Design Projects
Magazine redesign
Results
New Iowa DNR magazine designed for January 2007 launch
In addition to lead time reductions, Iowa DNR's has seen:
° The overall quality of permit applications increase;
D An increased ability to focus on "mission critical" work;
D A continuous process improvement culture integrated into the department; and
D Improved relationships with the regulated community and permit applicants.
As a result of these successes, Iowa DNR has committed to continuous process improvement by:
° Dedicating 1.5 full-time employees (FTEs) to focus on Lean Six Sigma development and
facilitation; and
D Training twelve DNR staff at Six Sigma green belt level to support future Lean Six Sigma events.
Iowa DNR, Air Division Results:
Success stemming from the first kaizen event in air construction permitting has fueled subsequent process
improvement initiatives within the Department. Results of this project include:
° Dedicating a team to address the air permit backlog;
D Eliminating sixteen process steps (23 to 7);
° Reducing permit handoffs from 18 to 4;
D Moving staff offices for better work flow;
D More complete air construction permit applications submitted; and
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 37
-------
D 600 air construction permit backlog eliminated.
Future Plans
° Iowa DNR plans to develop greater in-house capacity for leading lean six sigma events by
training a staff member to the Six Sigma black belt level.
° Iowa DNR will begin using value stream mapping techniques to identify priority projects for
process improvement.
° Beyond Iowa DNR, the Iowa Department of Management will add an Office of Lean Enterprise.
This Office will have a full time staff position charged with supporting Lean implementation
throughout Iowa's executive branch.
For More Information
State of Iowa, Office of Lean Enterprise
http://www.dom.state.ia.us/planning performance/lean/index.html
Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Air Quality Division—Air Construction Permitting Event
http://www.iowadnr.com/air/prof/kaizen/kaizen.html
http://www.iowadnr.com/air/news/articles/03novl3.html
http://www.iowadnr.com/air/news/articles/05jan08.html
Iowa Department of Natural Resource, Land Quality Division-
http://www.iowadnr.com/land/ust/kaizen.html
For additional information, contact:
Teresa Hay McMahon
Performance Results Director
Iowa Department of Management
State Capitol Building
Des Moines, IA. 50319
(515)281-6537
teresa.mcmahon@iowa.gov
-LUST event
Liz Christiansen, Deputy Director
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
502 E. 9th Street
Des Moines, IA. 50319-0034
(515)281-3388
liz.christiansen(S>dnr.state.ia.us
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 38
-------
Michigan Lean Process Improvement Initiative
State Agency: Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Methods Implemented: Value Stream Mapping
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), partly in response to pressure from the regulated
community, citizens, and state government, applied value stream mapping to the air "permit to install"
(PTI) application review process in April 2004 and to a land and water management wetland permitting
process in 2005. For the air permitting process, Michigan DEQ Air Quality Division (AQD), along with
General Motors, DaimlerChrysler, Ford, the Michigan Manufacturer's Association, and Michigan's
Department of Labor and Economic Growth, conducted a pre-scoping exercise to identify customer needs
and then used a VSM workshop to develop an implementation plan for process improvements to achieve
a "future state" goal of having all applications reviewed and acted upon in less than six calendar months.
The new process enables permit applicants to provide more complete and timely submittals and has
allowed the AQD to perform technical analyses quickly and efficiently by eliminating rework and waiting.
Within one year of conducting the VSM process improvement, air permit processing time decreased by
two-thirds (66 percent) to less than 60 days and the number of in-house applications was reduced by one
half (50 percent). While the results have not been as dramatic to date for the other VSM initiatives due to
budget constraints and timing, the Michigan DEQ continues its commitment to improve its business
processes.
Process Improvement Activities
Process
Air construction permitting
Land and water management
wetland permitting
Log letters (such as responses to
constituent letters to Governor)
Improvement Activities
Conducted a value stream mapping (VSM) workshop on the Permit
to Install (PTI) application review process (April 2004); results fully
implemented in September 2004
Conducted a VSM workshop on land and water management
wetland permitting (2005); results implementation is on-going
Conducted a VSM workshop on log letter response process (2006);
results implementation on-going
Project Initiation and Key Drivers
Industry considered Michigan's air permitting program to be cumbersome, slow, and unresponsive to the
needs of the regulated community. General Motors, supported by other members of the regulated
community, met with Michigan DEQ to discuss options for improving the Department air construction
permitting process, and they recommended holding a VSM workshop.
External Involvement and Technical Assistance
Process Improvement Advisory Group
Participants in the VSM workshop included staff-level people from the Michigan DEQ AQD, General
Motors, DaimlerChrysler, and Michigan's Department of Labor and Economic Growth. The Advisory
Group, made up of senior officials of these organizations, supported this Air Permitting Team throughout
the VSM initiative.
General Motors
General Motors, one of the largest companies operating in Michigan, expressed specific interest in
improving the air construction permitting process.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 39
-------
Facilitator
A General Motors facilitator with experience in value stream mapping was used.
Results
Based on the air permitting VSM workshop, the Michigan DEQ AQD has implemented a number of
process changes, including:
° Standardizing application information requirements for many source categories;
D Initiating permit scoping meetings;
° Creating "just in time" fast track permitting;
D Providing preliminary draft conditions to begin discussions and ensure clear communication
between the applicant and Michigan DEQ AQD;
° Establishing interim deadlines throughout the process for both the applicant and Michigan DEQ
AQD staff; and
° Installing an Access database permit tracking system.
As a result of these process changes, Michigan DEQ AQD has seen:
D Application process time for major permits reduced from 422 to 98 days;
° Application process time for minor permits reduced from 143 to 50 days;
D Application administrative completeness rise from 82 percent to 95 percent;
D ADQ staff time more effectively allocated to "mission critical" work;
D Improved relationships and communication with industry applicants and others; and
° A significant increase in staff morale.
Future Plans
D Michigan DEQ AQD will continue to maintain and improve upon the "future state" goals for the
air PTI process.
D Michigan DEQ AQD has begun to survey applicants and staff to evaluate the effectiveness of the
process and glean additional improvement ideas.
D The Michigan DEQ Director is looking into broader VSM implementation within the
Department.
For More Information
Michigan DEQ Overview of PTI Application Process Improvement:
http://www.deq.state.mi.us/aps/miparp.shtml
For additional information, contact:
Lynn Fiedler, AQD Permit Section Chief Bill Presson, AQD Jackson District Supervisor
P.O. Box 30260 State Office Building, 4th Floor
Lansing, Michigan 48909 301 East Glick Highway
517-373-7087 Jackson, Michigan 49201
fiedlerl@,michigan.gov 517-780-7481
pressoni@,michigan. gov
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 40
-------
Minnesota Six Sigma Process Improvement Initiative
State Agency: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Methods Implemented: Six Sigma Process Improvement, Design for Six Sigma, Customer Focus, and
Lateral Thinking
As part of a continued commitment to increase efficiency and effectiveness, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (PCA) has initiated 21 Six Sigma agency projects (15 improvement, 4 design, and 2
discovery) and nearly 50 division projects focused on process standardization, all addressing both
regulatory and non-regulatory processes at the Agency. The Agency Commissioner recommended Six
Sigma improvement methods in response to an increasing number of industry complaints and an audit by
the state legislature drawing attention to permitting process inefficiencies. The first two projects—a
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) wastewater permitting project in 2003 and an
air construction permitting project in 2004—both occurred in conjunction with a Six Sigma training
program administered by the University of Minnesota. The Agency has since developed internal Six
Sigma methodology training and leadership capacity, and has used lean tools in addition to Six Sigma
process analyses. Minnesota PCA has also started to concentrate the time frame to complete its Six
Sigma projects.
Process Improvement Activities
Minnesota PCA has used Six Sigma process analysis on the following projects:
D Air construction permits (2004) D NPDES compliance determinations
° Administrative Penalty Order (APO) (2005)
issuance (2004) ° NPDES wastewater permits (2003)
° Board item process (2006) D Office of Environmental
° Communication (2005) Assistance/PCA grant effectiveness
(2004)
° Contracts (2004)
D Pollution prevention discovery project
° Data management strategy (2006) (2004)
" DELTA (regulatory database system) D § Ulg mformatlon and data trackmg
discovery project (2005) (2005*)
" Employee performance management D storm water program compliance (2004)
system (2005)
° Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP)
" Feedlot inspections (2005) operator n£ed to know (2004)
" File management (2005) D Water quaHty &ndmg gap (2005)
" Individual sewage treatment systems D Water quality grant data entry (2004)
(ISTS) county support (2005) 4^5 y^ )
° Watershed pass-through funding (2004 )
Project Initiation and Key Drivers
° The Minnesota PCA Commissioner used Six Sigma successfully at the 3M Company, and
initiated an Agency-wide Six Sigma process improvement initiative to address industry
complaints, improve Agency efficiency, and reduce permit backlogs. In addition, the Assistant
Commissioner provided a leadership role and significant guidance and support to Six Sigma
project teams.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 41
-------
External Involvement and Technical Assistance
University of Minnesota Carlson School of Management
The Carlson School of Management trained Minnesota PCA staff as champions and coaches at the Six
Sigma green and black belt level. Together with trained staff, University instructors assisted in the
development of deployment models for the NPDES project and the air construction permitting project.
Internal Consultant/Facilitator
Certified green and black belt Minnesota PCA staff to facilitate the Six Sigma process improvement
projects.
Results
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has achieved compelling results from its Six Sigma process
improvement. Six Sigma project success is commonly measured by the project's progression from Stage
1 (define) to Stage 5 (control), in addition to specific improvement metrics. The following is an overview
of both organizational and cultural changes in the Agency, and specific process changes identified during
the Six Sigma process analysis.
Minnesota PCA Six Sigma Project Status and Sample Results
Minnesota PCA has used Six Sigma Process methodology on 21 Agency projects. The projects are each
in various stages of progress as shown in the table below.
Six Sigma Projects
Air construction permits
Administrative Penalty Order Issuance
Board item process
Communication
Contracts
Data management strategy
DELTA discovery project
Employee performance
management system
Feedlot inspections
File management
ISTS county support
NPDES inspection
NPDES wastewater permits
OEA/PCA grant effectiveness
Pollution prevention discovery
Spills information and data tracking
Storm water program compliance
Define
Measure
X
Analyze
X
X
X
Improve/
Design
Control/
Validate
X
X
X
N/A
N/A
X
N/A
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
N/A
X
X
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 42
-------
Six Sigma Projects
(WWTP) operator need to know
Water quality funding gap
Water quality grant data entry
Watershed pass-through funding
Define
Measure
Analyze
Improve/
Design
Control/
Validate
X
X
X
X
In addition to project progression through the five Six Sigma stages, Minnesota PCA has improved
permitting timeliness by:
° Issuing 75 percent of NPDES permits within 180 days (historical baseline of 9 percent);
D Reducing the NPDES reissuance permitting backlog from nearly 50 percent to 8 percent;
° Issuing 75 percent of air construction permits within 150 days (baseline of 33 percent);
° Public noticing 88 percent of air construction permits within 120 days (baseline 44 percent); and
D Administrative Penalty Orders issued and case closed 69 percent within 165 days (baseline 23
percent).
Agency-Wide Results
As a result of Six Sigma project process improvements, Minnesota PCA has experienced:
° Greater staff ownership of projects and processes;
D An increased ability to focus on "mission critical" work;
D Improved internal Agency communication;
D Improved communication with external stakeholders;
D Integration of a continuous process improvement culture into the Agency; and
D Improved relationships with the regulated community.
The Agency successes have led Minnesota PCA to commit to continuous process improvement by:
D Training all Agency managers and supervisors at green belt leadership level;
D Training all Agency executives at black belt leadership level;
D Trained 4 certified black belt level Agency staff to support the process improvement efforts at
both the Agency and division level;
° Developing internal capability to train staff at a green belt level;
D Trained 35 staff at "internal black belt" leadership level; and
D Successfully trained and certified 183 employees at the green belt level.
Future Plans
D Minnesota PCA will continue to follow the deployment plan to reach project objectives.
D The Agency will integrate a process management approach into the Agency's leadership.
D The Agency plans to further its process capability and to continuously seek out improvement and
standardization of mission critical work at the division level.
D Minnesota PCA plans to maintain long-term gains and improvements through the incorporation
of a culture change mentality.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 43
-------
For More Information
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency—Water Quality Six Sigma Process Improvement Project
http ://www.pca. state.mn.us/water/wq-complianceprocess .html
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency—Quality Management Plan
http ://www.pca. state.mn.us/publications/reports/qmp .pdf
For additional information, contact:
Rod Massey, P.E. Director
Operational Support Division
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
rod.masseyigipca.state.mn.us
651-297-8320
James Warner, P.E. Director
Industrial Division
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
jim.warnerigjpca.state.mn.us
651-296-7333
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 44
-------
Nebraska's Business Process Improvement Initiative
State Agency: Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
Methods Implemented: Kaizen Event, On-Going Process Reviews, and Evaluations
The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), in response to a dramatic increase in the
number of air construction permit applications submitted, especially those for ethanol production facilities,
held a week-long kaizen rapid process improvement event in February 2005, aimed at improving its air
quality construction permitting process. A post-kaizen workshop followed for new staff, as well as those
who did not participate in the kaizen event. Several changes were implemented as a result of these
events, including adding additional staff positions, placing an emphasis on the pre-application process,
standardizing permit applications, implementing a permit review timeframe, creating a permit hotline, and
establishing a permit tracking system. The changes implemented have reduced the amount of time
between when Nebraska DEQ receives completed applications and starts the public comment period,
and the time needed to make a decision after the close of the public comment period.
Process Improvement Activities
Process
Air Construction Permitting
Improvement Activities
Conducted kaizen event focusing on all aspects of the air
construction permitting process, including outreach and information,
public participation and staff concerns, modeling, and the permitting
process itself.
Project Initiation and Key Drivers
° Nebraska DEQ developed a multifaceted improvement action plan that included participating in a
related kaizen event at the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and conducting a kaizen event
focused on Nebraska DEQ air construction permitting process. The Department identified
possible improvements to the air construction permitting program in order to address an increased
number of ethanol plant permit applications, Nebraska DEQ permit backlog, and the need to
process applications within shorter timeframes.
D The Nebraska DEQ Director invited persons from government and industry to be part of a
Business Advisory Group to help NDEQ identify areas in the permitting process where
improvements could be made.
External Involvement and Technical Assistance
Business Advisory Group
Members of the Business Advisory Group provided Nebraska DEQ with a list of recommendations in the
permitting process where improvements were needed and identified individuals from business, industry,
and government to participate with the Department in the kaizen process.
Facilitator
A Nebraska DEQ Air Quality Division staff member with a background in teaching graduate college
courses in organizational behavior and development facilitated both the activities of the Business
Advisory Group and the kaizen event.
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 45
-------
Results
Nebraska DEQ has implemented a number of changes as a result of the kaizen event, including:
D Standardizing permit template language;
D Requiring pre-application meetings for more complex permit applications;
D Emphasizing pre-application information and activities;
° Implementing program with agreed upon timeframes (Applicant and Department);
D Developing Ethanol and Generic Air Construction Permit Application Packages;
° Establishing a toll-free permit hotline;
D Increasing the number of Department staff positions; and
D Developing a rudimentary permit tracking system on the Department webpage.
As a result of these process changes, Nebraska DEQ has seen:
D More complete permit applications submitted;
D Improved communication with industry applicants;
D A 50 percent reduction in review time for ethanol plant air construction permits;
D An almost 50 percent reduction in review time for all air construction permits;
D A 55 percent reduction in the air construction permitting backlog; and
D Air Quality Division staff gain greater ownership of the process, empowering them to identify
and address improvement opportunities.
Future Plans
° Nebraska DEQ will continue to implement the kaizen event goals by improving the Agency's
website, and establish a more refined permit tracking system.
D Nebraska DEQ will continue to have process improvement meetings with staff, as well as senior
Department management, to monitor progress and identify additional areas for improvement.
For More Information
The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality Website:
http://www.deq.state.ne.us/
For additional information, contact:
The Nebraska Department of
Environmental Quality
1200 "N" Street, Suite 400
P.O. Box 98922
Lincoln, NE 68509-8922
(402)471-2186
Shelley Kaderly
Division Administrator
Air Quality Division
Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality
(402)471-2186
Shellev.Kaderlv@ndeq.state.ne.us
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 46
-------
United States Environmental Protection Agency
September 2006
EPA-100-R-06-006
Working Smart for Environmental Protection — 47
------- |