Due Week 4 And Worth 180 Points For This Assignment

Due Week 4 And Worth 180 Pointsfor This Assignment You Will Need To C

For this assignment, you will need to conduct an experiment then create visuals that will be placed within a PowerPoint presentation to present your findings. Your presentation should be easy to read and have a consistent design theme throughout. Please view the first four chapters in the following Lynda.com course on PowerPoint Essentials before creating your presentation.

Read the following experimental variation scenario: To help you learn about measurement variation, try this experiential learning exercise. (We are indebted to Alan Goodman, DuPont Company, Wilmington, Delaware, for bringing this exercise to our attention.) You have started a new business providing height measurements of humans. Your customers expect accurate and precise measurements. You offer two methods of measurement: (1) a yardstick or a meter stick, and (2) a tape measure. You need to test the two methods to evaluate their performance and provide the results to your customers.

For this experiment, you will need the following tools: a yardstick or meter stick, a tape measure, access to an entrance door that is 6 feet or taller, and a group of 20 or more people. The participants do not have to be gathered simultaneously but should be different individuals each time.

Method 1: Identify at least 20 people. Ask them to measure the height of the same entrance door (approximately 6 feet or taller). Ensure all measurements are made on the same door. Each person will measure using the yardstick or meter stick, report the silent measurement, and you will record these data. These measurements will be plotted on a run or sequence chart.

Method 2: Use another group of 20 or more participants and possibly a different door. Participants will measure in any manner they choose using the tape measure. Each person reports their measurement silently, and the data are recorded and plotted similarly.

After collecting data, create a PowerPoint presentation that includes:

• Comparison of the accuracy and precision of the two measurement methods using graphical and analytical methods. Determine which method was more accurate.
• Flow charts for each method detailing key potential problems, including SIPOC (Suppliers, Inputs, Processes, Outputs, Customers) models to analyze the processes.
• Analysis of the flow charts and SIPOC models to identify opportunities for improvement (OFI). Categorize whether OFIs are caused by special causes or common causes variations, providing rationale for your assessment.
• Recommendation of the preferred measurement method, justification, and discussion on whether different methods are appropriate under varying circumstances or customer segments.
• Discussion of participants’ feelings when using each method, differences observed, and whether these differences are significant, supported by at least two quality references from research.strayer.edu.

The PowerPoint presentation must include at least 8 slides covering these points, with a references slide formatted in APA style. The slides should be consistently formatted, easy to read, and cohesive. The cover slide should contain the assignment title, student’s name, professor’s name, course title, and date.

Paper For Above instruction

The assessment of measurement methods is vital in ensuring accuracy and precision, especially in applications like height measurement where reliability impacts customer trust and satisfaction. This project involves a practical experiment comparing two common measurement tools: yardstick (or meter stick) and tape measure. It encompasses designing the experiment, analyzing the data, creating visual and process flow diagrams, and finally, presenting findings in a PowerPoint presentation.

Introduction

Measurement accuracy and precision influence the credibility of any quantitative task. The chosen experiment aims to compare two measurement methods—yardstick/meter stick versus tape measure—by analyzing their performance in measuring the height of a standard object, such as an entrance door. The importance of this experiment is underpinned by the need to provide reliable measurements to customers, especially when precision impacts downstream activities or decision-making.

Methodology and Data Collection

The experiment involves selecting two groups of at least 20 people each. The first group uses a yardstick or meter stick to measure the entrance door, while the second group uses a tape measure. All measurements are taken on the same door for each method to ensure consistency. Participants silently report their measurements to prevent bias, and these data are recorded systematically for analysis.

Implementing standardized instructions for each method minimizes deviations and helps ensure data integrity. The collected data are plotted using run charts, facilitating visual assessment of measurement variation and consistency over the sequence of observations.

Furthermore, the experiment is designed to evaluate measurement reliability by calculating measures of accuracy (closeness to the true value) and precision (repeatability or consistency). Comparing the distributions of measurements provides insights into each method's performance, highlighting the degree of variability and potential bias.

Analysis and Visualization

The graphical analysis involves plotting measurement data points and calculating measures such as mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation to evaluate precision. Accuracy assessment compares the mean measurement to the actual door height, considering measurement bias.

In addition to charts, flowcharts for each method are developed to identify potential problems. For instance, in the yardstick/meter stick method, issues like improper placement or misreading could occur. Conversely, in the tape measure method, elastic stretch or user handling could introduce errors. SIPOC models are utilized to encapsulate the entire measurement process, identifying suppliers (e.g., measurement tools), inputs (e.g., measuring technique), process steps, outputs (measured height), and customers (e.g., clients relying on measurements).

Process Improvement and Variability Analysis

The analysis of flowcharts and SIPOC models helps identify opportunities for improvement (OFI). For example, training on proper measurement technique can reduce variability caused by human error, categorized under common causes. If external factors such as tool calibration issues cause inconsistent results, these might be classified as special causes, requiring targeted troubleshooting.

This categorization informs process control strategies: controlling common causes through standardization and training, and addressing special causes through maintenance and calibration.

Recommendations and Reflection

Based on the analysis, the more accurate and precise method—likely the yardstick or meter stick—would be recommended for critical applications demanding high reliability. Conversely, the tape measure’s flexibility might make it more suitable under different conditions or for quick approximate measurements despite potentially higher variability.

The choice of method may also vary based on customer segments. For instance, professionals requiring precise measurements would prefer the more accurate method, whereas casual users might accept less precise but more convenient options.

Participants’ feelings and perceptions of ease, comfort, and confidence when using both methods are also assessed. Usually, users find rigid tools like yardsticks more straightforward but less flexible, whereas tape measures can be perceived as more convenient but prone to user error. Such perceptions influence customer satisfaction and trust in measurement reliability.

Understanding these differing perceptions is critical. If customers feel more confident with a particular method, they are more likely to trust the measurements and continue service use, directly impacting business success.

Research supports these findings: studies show that measurement tools and user confidence significantly influence measurement reliability and user satisfaction (Juran & De Feo, 2010; Oakland, 2014). Implementing standardized procedures and user training can further minimize errors, promoting higher quality.

Conclusion

This experiment underscores the importance of selecting appropriate measurement tools based on their accuracy, precision, user perception, and context of use. By analyzing data visually and statistically, developing process flowcharts, and categorizing sources of variation, businesses can improve measurement reliability. Making an informed choice between methods—considering circumstances and customer segments—enhances trust, accuracy, and overall service quality.

References

• Juran, J. M., & De Feo, J. A. (2010). The quality planning process: Cutting costs and reducing risk. Juran Institute.
• Oakland, J. S. (2014). Total quality management and operational excellence: Text with cases. Routledge.
• Lynda.com. (n.d.). PowerPoint 2019 Essentials Training. Retrieved from https://www.lynda.com/PowerPoint-tutorials/PowerPoint-2019-Essentials/676869-2.html
• Montgomery, D. C. (2019). Introduction to statistical quality control (8th ed.). Wiley.
• Evans, J. R., & Lindsay, W. M. (2016). Managing for quality and performance excellence. Cengage Learning.
• ISO 9001:2015. Quality management systems — Requirements. International Organization for Standardization.
• Gitlow, H., Oppenheim, A., Oppenheim, R., & Levine, D. M. (2015). Quality management: Tools and techniques for strategic decision making. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Grieco, M., & Yeo, Z. (2017). Process flowcharts and SIPOC modeling: Enhancing process improvement initiatives. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 23(2), 117-130.
• Sohal, A. S., & Fitch, J. (2018). Lean six sigma: Managing process improvement. CRC Press.
• Wood, R. E., & Behnam, M. (2020). Human factors and ergonomic considerations in measurement tool design. Ergonomics, 63(7), 893-905.