1 / 63

OAS – 07 – 001 (3W)

OAS – 07 – 001 (3W).

kirima
Download Presentation

OAS – 07 – 001 (3W)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OAS – 07 – 001 (3W) Project Title : Enhancing the Effectiveness of the OAS e-NewsletterChampion : Mr. Larry S.H. SimTeam Leader : Cathy Reyes-AngusAsst. Team Leader: Alice LimMembers : Philip Gutierrez, Sheila Lyn Sanga, Edzen Garcia, Danny Santos, Julie Mendoza

  2. Project Charter DEFINE BUSINESS CASE One of the targets set in the 2007 Departmental Scorecard is to ensure that OAS objectives and programs are understood and appreciated (T14). How do we hit this target? By continuously enhancing strategic communications and promoting OAS branding (SP14). How do we enhance departmental communication and the OAS brand? By enhancing the effectiveness of our departmental communication tools, one of which is the OAS e-Newsletter: the official internal newsletter of the department. Taking off from the BSC strategic objectives, it is critical to evaluate the effectiveness of the e-Newsletter and find out if it’s meeting its primary objective of keeping OAS staff informed and updated. For purpose of this project, we shall focus on the effectiveness, which will be measured based on the visit duration recorded for the 8 and 22 June 2007 issues of the OAS e-Newsletter.

  3. Project Charter DEFINE PROBLEM STATEMENT Data were collected for the last 2 issues of the e-Newsletter – i.e., 8 and 22 June. Visit duration was monitored and generated by WebTrends – a software used to monitor the user’s online activity. On 8 June issue, 73% of the population registered a visit duration of 0-1 minute. On 22 June issue, 67% of the population registered a visit duration of 0-1 minute. The data indicate that majority of the population do not view the e-Newsletter longer than 1 minute. This also shows that they do not read the entire content of the e-Newsletter and that the activity level by length of visit is low.

  4. Project Charter DEFINE • The data gathered during those periods showed that there is no • problem in terms of staff interest and awareness (i.e., staff opening the • e-Newsletter) about the e-Newsletter. • 8 June issue = 168 visits or 94% • 22 June issue = 146 visits or 82% • However, opening the e-Newsletter does not necessarily mean that the • tool is read or is read thoroughly. This also does not serve as a good • basis to measure the tool’s effectiveness in meeting its objectives of • keeping the staff informed and updated of the department’s activities. • Hence, we focused on visit duration or the length of time that the staff • member reads the entire e-Newsletter page.

  5. Project Charter DEFINE 8 June 2007 Issue – 73%

  6. Project Charter DEFINE 22 June 2007 Issue – 67%

  7. Project Charter DEFINE GOAL STATEMENT • To evaluate the effectiveness of the e-Newsletter by monitoring the population’s visit duration. • To enhance the effectiveness of the e-Newsletter by increasing the visit duration to > 2 minutes. • To identify other creative ways to enhance the effectiveness of the e-Newsletter while ensuring its alignment with the departmental BSC objectives.

  8. Project Charter DEFINE OPERATIONAL DEFINITION Effectiveness– the length of visit registered per issue of the e-Newsletter. Visit duration– the number of minutes the e-Newsletter was viewed.

  9. Highlevelprocessmap DETERMINING CONTENT: Collates inputs from OAS Divisions Week 1 ENCODING: Notes version is prepared. Week 2 DEFINE START PREPARATION OF 1ST DRAFT: for PD, OAS’ initial comments / edits. COLLECTION OF GRAPHICS, PHOTOS and LINKS: Images and other documents are collated. REVISION 1: Second/edited draft prepared for OAS Directors and Head, PCU final review /inputs REVISION 2: Notes version prepared for PD’s final review/edits. REVISION 3, if any PUBLICATION: Approved e-Newsletter is published END

  10. CTQ Matrix DEFINE

  11. SIPOC Diagram DEFINE

  12. MEASURE Data Collection Plan

  13. Pareto chart 22 June 2007 MEASURE

  14. Histogram Histogram of Duration of Visit MEASURE

  15. Graphical Summary Non-Normal MEASURE

  16. MEASURE Process Capability

  17. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  18. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  19. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  20. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  21. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  22. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007

  23. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007 Why are they not staying on the e-Newsletter for more than 1 minute? • Text heavy/long articles – hard to read online • Small font size • Lack of human interest features/stories • Lack of graphics/images/photos • Lack of links to articles or websites about professional/personal improvement

  24. ANALYZE FORM & CONTENT PROCESS Lack of human interest features Long news articles News items are not easily identified Small font size Inconsistent time of publishing Hard to read online Newsletter title is not catchy Lack of manpower Perceived duplication of content Lack of work-related links Lack of images Lack of staff with right skills Lack of photos No awareness campaign BG on online publishing Unbalanced layout “why” read the newsletter Readers stay for < 1 minute No time to read Server is not available Staff is busy with other matters Existence of system bug Heavy network traffic WORKLOAD SYSTEM & EQUIPMENT

  25. ANALYZE FORM & CONTENT PROCESS C Lack of human interest features N C Long news articles News items are not easily identified C Small font size C Inconsistent time of publishing C Hard to read online N Newsletter title is not catchy Lack of manpower C Perceived duplication of content Lack of work-related links Lack of images N C Lack of staff with right skills Lack of photos No awareness campaign C BG on online publishing Unbalanced layout “why” read the newsletter Readers stay for < 1 minute C N N No time to read Server is not available Staff is busy with other matters N Existence of system bug N Heavy network traffic WORKLOAD SYSTEM & EQUIPMENT

  26. ANALYZE FORM & CONTENT C Lack of human interest features C Long news articles Small font size C C Hard to read online Newsletter title is not catchy C Lack of work-related links Lack of images C Lack of photos Unbalanced layout Readers stay for < 1 minute C C Inconsistent time of publishing C No awareness campaign “why” read the newsletter PROCESS

  27. IMPROVE Initial Results of Brainstorming of Proposed Solutions

  28. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE TEAM’S BRAINSTORMING Why are they not staying on the e-Newsletter for more than 1 minute? • Text heavy/long articles – hard to read online • Small font size • Lack of human interest features/stories • Lack of graphics/images/photos • Lack of links to articles or websites about professional/personal improvement

  29. ANALYZE RESULTS OF THE FGD CONDUCTED ON 11 MAY 2007 Why are they not staying on the e-Newsletter for more than 1 minute? • Text heavy/long articles – hard to read online • Small font size • Lack of human interest features/stories • Lack of graphics/images/photos • Lack of links to articles or websites about professional/personal improvement

  30. IMPROVE

  31. IMPROVE BEFORE AFTER PROBLEM #1. Text heavy/long blurbs

  32. IMPROVE PROBLEM #2. Small fonts

  33. IMPROVE PROBLEM #3. Lack of human interest features

  34. IMPROVE PROBLEM #4. Lack of graphics/photos

  35. IMPROVE

  36. IMPROVE

  37. IMPROVE PROBLEM #5. Lack of links to articles/websites about professional development.

  38. IMPROVE

  39. BEFORE

  40. AFTER

  41. IMPROVE Readers’ Feedback “This is really a beautiful issue and would attract readers to read from top to bottom! Congratulations. I like the cartoons...because it's true!” “OAS-Newsletter - nice issue! :)” “It's good to see that the inputs given in the FGD you conducted have been implemented in the latest OAS newsletter. The new layout and the incorporation of just the right mix of business news and "slice of life" items makes it an easy(ier) read. Am looking forward to see the forthcoming issues.” “Great work on the new layout. The expanded screen layout, looks better.” “I like that new feature wherein I can change the size of the font. Very user-friendly. But you may want to inform others of this great feature.”

  42. IMPROVE Readers’ Feedback

  43. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #1 20 July issue Note the shift of the majority from (0.75 = 0 to 1 min) to (1.50 = 1 to 2 min). However, it is still below the target of > 2 minutes.

  44. Redesigned issue #1 20 July issue IMPROVE

  45. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #1 20 July issue Z.Bench = 0.09

  46. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #2 3 August issue Bar Chart of Duration of Visit The visit duration for the second redesigned issue (3 August) also increased. It shows an improvement over the baseline (i.e. -0.13).

  47. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #2 3 August issue

  48. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #2 3 August issue Z.Bench = 1.00

  49. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #3 17 August

  50. IMPROVE Redesigned issue #3 17 August

More Related