Reengineering Resource Center: Templates and Case Studies
Home
Reengineering Resource Center
Templates
How do you map business processes?
For each area listed, The Lab's templates provide:
- Business process definition
- BPM tools
- Workflow surveys
- Value stream maps
- Workflow analysis
- Benchmarking tools
- Lean Six Sigma tools
- Lean improvements and benefits
Contact The Lab for more information.
|
Case Studies
The Lab's case studies and project profiles provide detailed descriptions of the non-technology improvement projects we have implemented with our clients. Search the organizations and industries highlighted below to review the quantified results we have delivered for our clients. Contact Us for even more information.
Contact The Lab for more Templates and Case Studies
|
|
Financial Services: Insurance
|
|
Financial Services: Insurance Case Study
|
| |
Case Study 2 of 6
Previous Next
|
| |
Fortune 200 Insurer
Property & Casualty
Finance Group Operations
North America; Europe
Project Sponsor: Senior Vice President
Project Description:
- Self-funding non-technology improvement effort for the global finance organization to support deployment of a new automated general ledger system [by others].
- Scope of project:
- Financial close
- Management reporting
- Premium accounting
- Invoicing/Accounts Receivable
- Accounts Payable
- Deductible billing
- Improvement benefits
- Operating cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ↓15%
- Annual savings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3.0M
- Head count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ↓12%
- Break even point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 mos.
- ROS [12 month] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5x
- Service improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ↑20%
|
|
Finance Group Operations
Situation Analysis: After installing a sophisticated firm-wide Enterprise Resource Planning [ERP] technology with an integrated Finance capability, ClientCo's CFO failed to see the promised breakthrough in operating performance gains. An internal Six Sigma team contacted The Lab to identify non-technology improvements and rapidly improve performance.
Improvements Identified: The Lab began with an eight week Phase I analysis of ClientCo's entire North American Finance group organization and operating processes. The Lab's standardized improvement templates helped pinpoint more than 275 activity level improvements. Most [80%] required no technology change [Class I Improvements]. Roughly 25% of these could be implemented in 1-2 months. The remaining Class I improvements were all completed within six months from start of implementation. Examples:
- Financial Close Rework — Needless complexity in allocations consumed 30-50% of Finance staff capacity with corrections, clarifications and on-the-fly re-training of data submitters. The new ERP technology increased an already bloated chart of accounts by an additional 40%. Account names and purposes were inconsistent and poorly documented across business groups, locations, and facilities.
- Management/Financial Reporting — The vast majority of costly staff time [85%] was devoted to the lowest value activities: Gathering and scrubbing data [65%], generating and distributing reports [20%]. Only 15% of capacity was devoted to the tasks most requested by business units – financial analysis. The proliferation of ad hoc and “one off” reports was a major root cause.
- Budgeting and Planning [for Operations] — The cycle time for finalization and formal approval of operating budgets extended slightly over half of the fiscal year at ClientCo. Even after this arduous process, at least 20% of budgets were significantly off plan with minimal quantitative insight or justification regarding the causes. Contributing factors: Over 80% of underlying financial assumptions were documented as incorrect at the start; only 20% of the budget incorporated unit cost and productivity data; 4-5 budget meeting iterations were considered "normal" for finalization.
Overall Results: The self-finding implementation effort reduced the low value tasks by over 60%. Within six months, all project costs were recouped. At month 12, payback exceeded 2.5X. Improvements were more than 80% applicable to European operations.
|