DMAIC Editing Process Aim To enhance the quality

DMAIC Editing Process Aim: - To enhance the quality of footage used in editing

Voice of Customer - VOC Customer Define Comments Critical to Quality - CTQ’s Head - Editing Quality and Quantity of footage that we receive is not good and insufficient which leads to problems for editors to edit. Quality of the footage should be at least ‘Good’ on the rating scale of ‘Very Poor’, ‘Average’, ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’. Quantity of the footage should be at least ‘Sufficient’ on the rating scale of ‘Highly Sufficient’, ‘Sufficient’, ‘Average’, ‘Insufficient’, ‘Highly Insufficient’. Team - Editing We are under immense pressure most of the time and are given lesser time for edit. We need good quality of footage as well as sufficient time for edit. Quality of the footage should be at least ‘Good’ on the rating scale of ‘Very Poor’, ‘Average’, ‘Good’, ‘Very Good’. VP - Operations

Define Project Charter Business case Team ABC Ltd runs news channels under its bouquet. Editing team converts raw video / audio footage into news viewable on-air. Bad quality of footage leads to dissatisfaction in editors, wasted time & § VP - Operations efforts in editing which negatively affects the operations productivity. § Project Coordinator § Head – Editing & Team There is need to find the root cause and reduce the use of bad quality § Head - Camera & Team footage so that editing department can deliver packages faster and with better quality. Problem Statement Goal Statement Having analysed the data for Quality & Quantity of Footage for editing for the month of June ’ 12, signifies that out of 5549 no. of footage used 11. 68 % (648 in Count) of it has rating Average or less on the rating The goal of this project is to reduce no. of scale of ‘Very Good, Average, Poor, Very Poor’ in Quality which unacceptable Quality footage being supplied to needs to be addressed in order for the editing team to work more editing team by 10 % (64 in Count) to 584 by 14 th Oct efficiently. ’ 12. Milestones Target Date Actual date D 10 th Aug ‘ 12 9 th Aug ‘ 12 In Scope : Quality of footage, Camera Department, Editing Department in Head Office. M 20 th Aug ‘ 12 A 11 th Sept ‘ 12 Out Scope : Any thing not mentioned in inscope I 4 th Oct ‘ 12 C 14 th Oct ‘ 12 Project Scope:

S I P O C SIPOC Analysis and Map : : Editing Process Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Customers Edited Package Producers Process Description: Conversion of raw footage into meaningful information by editing of stories to make them viewable on-air. Script Producers Request received Footage Graphics VO Search for footage, graphics, VO, etc. Edit Deliver

Measure Data Collection Plan What to measure Project -Y Operational Definition Quality of Daily Footage Defect Def Quality of footage in editing LSL Quality rating scale : - Very Good, Average, Poor, Very Poor ------------------------ Quality of Footage Quality Definition: - Sharpness, Footage <= >= Good Contrast, Brightness, Colour, Average Proper frame How to measure Project -Y Specification Limit Performance Std Data Type Data Items Needed S. No. , Date, Channel, Editor Discrete Name, Package Type, Shift, Machine No. , Producer/Report er/Stringer Name, Location, Story, Bulletin Time, In Time, Out Time, Pkg duration (MM: SS), FF/TS/SS (Quality, Opportunity USL Reduce supply of Very Good footage having quality <= Average Good Plan to sample Plan to collect Data Formula to be used Unit Count What Is this If new, When is Database or an When will the planned Measuring Container will existing Equipment be used to database start date record this e or be ready for data? new? use? collection? Manual, Excel Existing NA NA