LT 24-05 – CMS 2.0 Assessment
06/03/24 - ATAP, NSD, Physics & Engineering
LEARNING TEAM NUMBER: 24-05
REQUESTOR: Multi-division
SPONSOR: Asmita Patel
FACILITATOR: Aaron Potash/James Newman
PARTICIPANTS:
James Swanson, Gordon Nelson, Zachary Eisentraut, Craig Tindall
FIRST MEETING DATE: 08/26/24
SECOND MEETING DATE: 08/27/24
- Explore quality control issues with RFID adhesion.
- Develop more consistent and efficient chemical tracking strategies.
- Enhance communication and oversight in the procurement process to ensure CMS 2.0 owners are aware of all chemical orders.
- Assess training content and methods to ensure a user’s working knowledge of CMS 2.0
- Clarify the purpose and management of expiration dates.
- Acknowledge the time commitment of CMS 2.0 owners and ensure they are adequately supported and recognized.
- Address chemical contamination issues during transport and handling.
Understand and improve the current state of CMS 2.0 by interfacing with system users (stakeholders). The findings from this assessment provide potential next steps in refining the system to facilitate our users' needs and improve overall chemical management practices.
Key Learnings:
- RFID Tags: Issues with tag adhesion and scannability on specific metal containers were noted.
- Chemical Tracking: Variations in tracking methods across different lab sizes and groups led to difficulty managing chemicals.
- Ownership and Procurement: Chemicals can be ordered by non-CMS 2.0 owners in the CMS 2.0 owner’s name, leading to potential gaps in awareness of their inventories.
- Training: The current CMS 2.0 training methods may not adequately meet the needs of all users. The complexity of the procedures raises concerns about retaining knowledge of the processes and tasks.
- Chemical Reconciliation: Challenges in managing chemical inventory, particularly during reconciliation, were identified.
- Expiration Dates: Uncertainty around the management and purpose of expiration dates within CMS 2.0 was a concern.
- Scope of work and Recognition: CMS 2.0 owners’ time commitment and roles were underestimated, requiring clarity and recognition of responsibilities.
- Chemical Contamination: Instances of contamination in chemicals for specific projects were flagged.