Impact_Assessment - Google Drive


1	Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
2
3	Process Name:	Recruiting process (Powerday)			Prepared by:	John Doe
4	Responsible:	Human Resources			FMEA Date:	4/28/2002
5
6	Process Step, Feature or Function	Potential Failure Mode	Potential Failure Effects	SEV	Potential Causes	OCC	Current Controls	DET	RPN	Actions Recommended	Resp.	Actions Taken	SEV	OCC	DET	RPN
7	What is the feature, function or process step under investigation?	In what way could the feature, function or process step potentially fail to meet requirements or intent?	What is the impact on the Key Output Variables (Customer Need or Benefit) or internal requirements?	How Severe is the effect to the customer?	What are the causes of this Failure Mode? Typical failure causes result from process inputs.	How often does cause or FM occur?	What are the existing controls and procedures (inspection and test) that prevent the cause or the Failure Mode?	How likely is impact on the customer?		What are the actions for reducing the occurrence of the Cause, or improving detection? Should have actions only on high RPN's or easy fixes.	Who's responsible for the recommended action?	What are the completed actions taken with the recalculated RPN? Be sure to include completion month/year
8	Identify Candidate	Wrong candidate phone# in database	Multiple calls to reach candidate	1	Data entry error	4	Paper resume kept on file	4	16
9
10	Screen Candidate	Wrong candidate SS# in database	Ineffective criminal background check	10	Data entry error	4	Paper resume on file	4	160
11		Wrong candidate SS# in database	Ineffective criminal background check	10	Typo error on resume	1	None	1	10
12
13	Plan Powerday	Candidate in wrong job family Powerday (OA vs. PM)	Good candidate rejected	7	Ineffective phone screen diagnostic checklist	7	None	10	490	Customize phone scripts by job family	Bob Smith
14
15	Execute Powerday	Wrong BI packet in interviewer folder	Candidate must return for additional BI	4	Manual error- incorrect BI form in interview packet	4	None - identify error at consensus meeting	10	160
16
17	Facilitate Consensus	Candidate test scoring error	Good candidate sent home at lunch	7	Candidate given wrong test form	4	Test form and booklet have matching id numbers	4	112
18
19	Extend Offer	Relocation package offered in error	Changed offer reduces candidate's satisfaction	7	Candidate commute distance not verified	4	Offer letter check sheet (inconsistent use)	7	196	Offer letter check sheet signoff by senior recruiter prior to call	Amy Lee


1
2	Template Instructions
3
4	Prerequisites
5
6	1. Complete SIPOC
7	2. Identify process owners, performers, and stakeholders
8	3. Include all of the above in FMEA assessment
9
10	Completing the FMEA
11
12	1. For each process step in the SIPOC identify failure modes and fill in column B
13	2. For each failure mode in column B identify potential root causes and fill in column E
14	3. For each potential root cause identify existing controls and fill in column G
15	4. Score each line in the FMEA on for Severity, Occurrence and Detectability using scores in RPN Scale tab
16
17	Completing the Risk Mitigation Plan
18
19	1. Rank order root causes using the RPN score
20	2. Decide on a score threshold for taking corrective action
21	3. Collect and document actions recommended and the owners in columns J & K
22	4. Recalculate RPN scores after corrective action is taken and re-prioritize list


1	Definition of FMEA RPN Terms
2
3	Severity (of Effect)
4	Importance/impact of effect on customer requirements (1 = Not Severe, 10 = Very Severe)
5
6	Quant. Guidance	Rating	Qualitative Guidance
7	Quantitative Range		Qualitative Description	Risk to Goal Achievement	Internal Visibility	Reputation	Compliance Regulatory
8	$10 - $1000	1	Low	Minimal Impact to business area goals and no impact to comapny strategic imperitives	Manager	One or more work groups are impacted by an issue (no external customer impact).	Common compliance finding without serious impact
9	$1001 - $10K	4	Moderate	Impact to business area goals and/or limited impact to company strategic imperatives	Director	Critical business function is experiencing degradation.Customer facing outage that has a work-around.	Potential for compliance finding in exam reports but not significant enough to affect overall compliance rating
10	$10,001 - $100K	7	High	Possible material impact to business area goals and/or moderate impact to comapny strategic imperatives	VP	Critical business function is completely unavailable. Customer facing outage that has no work-around	Significant reputation issue with regulators
11	$100,001 - $500K	10	Extreme	Possible material impact to company strategic imperatives	President	Has immediate and significant impact to both external and internal customers.	Risk of major regulatory intervention (eg. MOU)
12
13	NOTE: a 1, 4, 7 and 10 scale is recommended
14
15
16
17	Occurrence (of Cause)
18	Frequency with which a given cause occurs and creates a Failure Mode. Can sometimes refer to the frequency of a Failure Mode (1 = Not Likely, 10 = Very Likely)
19
20			1 = once per quarter		4 = once per month
21			7 = once per week		10 = once per day
22
23	NOTE: a 1, 4, 7 and 10 scale is recommended
24
25
26
27	Detection (capability of the Current Controls)
28	Ability of current control scheme to detect: - the causes before creating failure mode - the failure modes before causing effect (1 = Likely to Detect, 10 = No controls exist)
29
30		Control Effectiveness Scale
31		Strength	Rating	Description
32		Strong	1	Preventive and detective controls are in place and operating effectively to mitigate risk to an acceptable level. Internal controls have ben optimized for operating efficiency.
33			4	A proper mix of preventive and detective controls in place and operating effectively. No control breakdowns have occurred that have not been properly addressed and there are no outstanding high or medium audit findings.
34			7	Minimal controls are in place. Risk may be mitigated to an acceptable level if improvements are not made. Control breakdowns have recently occurrect and/or there are outstanding high or medium audit findings that exist and have not been properly addressed
35		Weak	10	No preventive or detective controls are in place or controls are not properly
36
37	NOTE: a 1, 4, 7 and 10 scale is recommended


1	Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
2
3	Process Name:	New Project Example			Prepared by:
4	Responsible:	OPS			Revision Date:
5
6	Process Step, Feature or Function	Potential Failure Mode	Potential Failure Effects	SEV	Potential Causes	OCC	Current Controls	DET	RPN	Actions Recommended	Resp.	Actions Taken
7	What is the feature, function or process step under investigation?	In what way could the feature, function or process step potentially fail to meet requirements or intent?	What is the impact on the Key Output Variables (Customer Need or Benefit) or internal requirements?	How Severe is the effect to the customer?	What are the causes of this Failure Mode? Typical failure causes result from process inputs.	How often does cause or FM occur?	What are the existing controls and procedures (inspection and test) that prevent the cause or the Failure Mode?	How likely is impact on the customer?		What are the actions for reducing the occurrence of the Cause, or improving detection? Should have actions only on high RPN's or easy fixes.	Who's responsible for the recommended action?	What are the completed actions taken with the recalculated RPN? Be sure to include completion month/year
8	Global	Dual Processing more complex than anticipated	Increase in AHT Decrease in team productivity Impact to customer experience	7	Process is not clear agents Search functionality limited	10	Training Web based search	10	700	1. Solidify the design requirements for dual processing via web solution 2. Validate the web based system is end user compatible 3. Develop assumption of additional time required 4. Develop training for associates 5. Adjust personnel necessary to meet SL
9		Systems gets negative perception due to # of defects	Increases difficulty in change management for HC launches	1	High number of defects released	4	Change champions identified Guerilla testing	7	28
10		Training forgotten due to low usage of system	Increase in AHT Decrease in team productivity Impact to customer experience	7	Training complete well before actual first opportunity to use production system	4	Training materials	7	196
11		Contractors learn of new system and issues, lose faith in ability complete transactions effectively	Loss of contractor production, revenue loss	10	Poor Sales or Agent communication	1	None	1	10
12		System network slower than required	Increase in AHT Decrease in team productivity Impact to customer experience	7	Poor indexing Substand network capacity/bandwith	10	None	10	700	1. Role play a number of applications to determine AHT average vs. current system 2. Develop assumption of additiaonl time required 3. Adjust personnel as necessary
13		Uanble to report on basic metrics due to data systems	Not able to manage team effectively Not able to monitor controls	7	DW & Teradata sync issues	4	None?	4	112
14		Due to multiple desktops, clarity of where application is in the process (able to update a customer effectively)	Increase in AHT Decrease in team productivity Impact to customer experience	10	Poor communication / training of use of multiple systems	10	Web based search	7	700	1. Solidify the design requirements for dual processing via web solution 2. Validate the web based system is end user compatible 3. Develop assumption of additional time required 4. Develop training for associates 5. Adjust personnel necessary to meet SL
15
16
17	Originations	Paperwork issue results in a risk event	Increase in risks events Client revenue loss - delayed funding, Consumer provided incorrect info	10	Poor testing end to end Systematic issues	10	Testing	4	400	1. Test completely end to end,. In real life scenario. Create docs and send per client, receive actual physical copy from fax or Evatone 2. Review doc for complaince issues
18		Uanble to provide value past initial transaction (Able to look up Client info, transactions, issue resolution)	Poor customer experience	7	Unable to view Client info	7	None	4	196
19		Too complex having ALPS, Secured, Summit & Genesys	Increase in AHT Decrease in team productivity Impact to customer experience	4	Poor communication / training of use of multiple systems	10	Training	4	160
20
21
22
23
24	Decisioning	Due to frequency of credit exceptions, may not identify credit issue within SLA	Delayed application processing	4	ALPS primary system, limited volume on Summit	4	Training	4	64
25		No bank manager to route concurrence	Delayed application processing	1	Unclear escalation plan, poor mgmt training	1	Security for Ops managers created	1	1
26
27
28	Paperwork Execution	Auto paperwork function works incorrectly, may not be identified by agents real time	Increase in risks events Client revenue loss - delayed funding, Consumer provided incorrect info	10	Poor monitoring plan (proactive & reactive)	7	Testing	7	490	1. Test completely end to end,. In real life scenario. Create docs and send per client, receive actual physical copy from fax or Evatone 2. Review doc for complaince issues 3. Identify controls and monitoring 4. Create monitoring accountability 5. Execute
29		In flight applications not mapped to correct stage/status	Increase in risks events Client revenue loss - delayed funding, Consumer provided incorrect info	10	Poor data mapping	4	Testing	7	280
30
31
32
33	Funding	Ability to reconcile 2 systems	Incorrect corporate reporting Possible delay in contractor payment	10	Poor training System cannot perform function	7	Testing Guerilla testing	4	280
34		Ability for reconcilement output recipients to receive and input information	Unable to post transactions to accounts Unable to get paid for accounts Possible payment bounces	4	Systematic issue	7	Testing	4	112
35		Accounts not able to be funded	Revnue loss, Contractor retention	10	Systematic issue	1	Testing	1	10
36
37
38
39	Client Reg & Mgmt	Able to select the appropriate hierarchy structure for each Client	Not reflective of actual - incorrect payments, double work to correct	7	Poor understanding of Sales intent Sales understanding of hierarchy	7	Training	7	343	1. Training 2. Develop option sheet for Sales to select the appropriate hierarchy option 3. Install process to receive option sheet with each reg.
40		Issue of data consistency between pre & post Genesys systems	Unable to load previous accounts because not all old data captured electronically	10	System requires data that was not previous entered into ALPS	4	Testing	4	160
41		Ability to identify which system new contractor should be placed in	Could be poor experience for high value or complex client	4	Unclear instructions Misinturpretation of contractor value	7	Training	10	280
42		Offices want to use Down Payment	Down payment uses get negative impression and possibly stop using	7	Down payment users moved from ALPS before full launch	4	None	4	112
43
44
45
46
47
48