In the May/June issue of iSixSigma Magazine, the article, “Taking the Next Step: How to Eliminate Errors for Good,” offers an approach for managing human performance factors in an effort improve processes in service organizations.
An excerpt of a checklist used to measure human performance factors and gauge risk is featured in the magazine article. The following is a full version of the sample checklist.
Table 1: Sample Performance Factors Checklist
| Category | Performance Factors | Comments |
| Personnel | ||
| Experience | Staff turnover rate | |
| Staff experience | ||
| Supervisory experience | Indication of ability to guide and make decisions | |
| Percent of transfers/temporary employees | ||
| Staffing/Resources | Number of open requisitions | Indication of understaffing |
| Training | Documented training program | Indication of consistency in employee training |
| Documented competency assessment | Validates training under conditions of use | |
| Performance | Documented expectations for staff | Lets employees know what “good” is |
| Documented process for performance feedback | Lets employees know how they are performing | |
| Existence of employee development or mentoring program | Allows employees to improve and grow | |
| Process | ||
| Written directive | Documented procedures at point of use | Increased opportunity for compliance and consistency |
| Documented evidence of compliance | Audit processes can provide data and drive accountability | |
| Performance | Visible process targets | Indicates that expectations are established and known |
| Visible measure of process performance | Lets employees know how process is performing | |
| Documented corrective action process | Lets employees know how and when to react to process measures | |
| Benchmarking | Documented benchmarking process | Comparison to similar processes indicates a culture of continuous improvement |
| Documented benchmarking actions | Indicates action based on benchmark findings | |
| Communication | Documented process for directives/questions | A poorly defined communication process may indicate that information is not available when needed |
| Documented process to confirm receipt of information | Can indicate a culture of accountability and goal focus | |
| Documented process for collecting and acting on stakeholder feedback | Stakeholder satisfaction may impact communication and performance | |
| Data handling | ||
| Automation | Degree of automated system use | Manual processes increase opportunity for error |
| Complexity of tasks | ||
| Duration of process | Longer processes are more likely to be impacted by change, which increases the risk of performance failures | |
| Number of steps | More steps often result in more errors | |
| Number of handoffs | More handoffs often result in more errors | |
| Number of people touching process | Greater numbers decrease ownership and accountability | |
| Number of interruptions to the process | Greater numbers increase likelihood of process failure | |
| Planning | ||
| Forecasting/scheduling | Pre-project meetings | Indication of communication and understanding |
| Project meeting timing | Indication of whether appropriate preparation time is available prior to project initiation | |
| Procedure for integrated scheduling | The amount of structure can indicate the appropriate parties are involved and factors are considered | |
| Rate of process change | ||
| Standard process | Standardization can indicate decreased confusion and greater compliance | |
| Plan changes after pre-project meeting | Changes at or near project initiation result in confusion and an inability to plan | |
| Plan changes during project | Changes after project initiation result in confusion and increased likelihood of error |
