Learning Launch Tool 

 Challenge :    The sales and Quality Assurance ( QA ) people in our company spend a lot of time processing   detailed complaint reports which are required by law . This means the sales people have to   perform a task of entering complaint reports based on data received by customers for which they   are not specialists and that the QA people often have to go back to the sales team with additional   questions about the data entered since often data is mistaken or incomplete in the reports . In   addition the QA people also spend time translating these reports to submit to the head oﬃce   abroad .   These people spend therefore to much time on BVA ( Business Value - Added ) time . We need to   reduce this time so that the two groups can spend more time of real value added time such as   selling products for the sales people . 

 Selection of the learning launch tool :   In order to increase internal process eﬃciency we used the learning launch tool to improve , but as   the video in this course mentions , this should not only be based on assumptions , but fast and   cheap experiments should be performed to test a hypothesis . In this case our customers were   internal stakeholders , no external customers involved , which should actually make the learning   launch tool easier to implement because stakeholders could easily be involved in the testing . 

 Application : 

 State with a hypothesis : 

 Idea   Report automation by using our current online ordering system . Reports could be submitted online by the   sales team . The ordering system already contains part of the information needed for the reports and   therefore part of the data could be pre - populated leading to time eﬃciency and less mistakes ( online error   check ) . Also the system could partially translate the reports automatically . 

 Speciﬁc group of customers   In this case two internal stakeholder groups are the customers : 1 ) Sales people who write and submit reports 

 2 ) Quality Assurance ( QA ) people who process these reports 

 Needs   1 ) Currently spending a long time writing paper reports , scanning this submitting the reports by email . 

 2 ) Since the reports are handwritten by the sales staﬀ , many errors and omissions occur . A pre - check tool   would help . On top of that the QA people need to translate these reports . 

 The idea meets that need :   We need process improvement , involving BVA ( Business Value - Added ) time reductions so that the two   groups can spend more time of real value added time such as selling products for the sales people . 

 Better than the current alternatives   With an online submission system the submissions would be faster because some data can be   automatically retrieved from the system and allowing for automatic error checks . Also there would be no   more need to translate these reports manually . 

 Value creation 	 	  Execution 	  Defendability 	  Scalability 

 time eﬃciency 	 	  project team & 		  approved / buy - in 	  not applicable 

 external vendor 		  during kick - oﬀ 

 based on one test 

 Prioritize key assumptions   - Should lead to process time eﬃciency for sales and QA teams . 

 - Who will do the test : Sales and QA members assigned - How to do the test :    Enter excel sheet template created by QA - Timeframe :                 2 days - Cost :                          None 

 Design Test for Key Assumptions   - Both the sales team and the QA team did separate time calculation prognosis too ﬁnd out how much 

 time could be saved with the new system 

 Do the test   - Result : signiﬁcant time savings 

 Data conﬁrmed based on one test , with minor improvements needed to optimize the plan . 

 Insight gained from applying the tool :   The hypothesis part of the learning launch tool went well but we needed data ( no assumptions   and guesses ) to conﬁrm . The problem is that we have conﬁrmation bias . We would need to go out   and ﬁnd conﬁrming and disconﬁrming facts .   We did talk thoroughly with a limited number of sales and QA people in one - on - one and small   team meetings to go through the hypothesis to ﬁnd out conﬁrming and disconﬁrming facts .   The only experiment we did is go through the process and calculate possible time savings for   both the sales team and the QA team , but we could have done some more testing such as actual   observations to conﬁrm our hypothesis . The learning process was therefore not extensive enough ,    but still suﬃcient . We were able to make some adjustments based on feedback ( optimization to   allow for better results and smoother acceptance ) and get the project approved by the head   oﬃce . 

 Approach :   We have a good core team from various backgrounds working on this project , but what could   have been improved in earlier stages to improve conﬁrmation bias , improve quantity and quality of   data ?   - We did have a kick - oﬀ meeting with everyone involved but we should have done more 

 meetings with all stakeholders in earlier stages . 

 - We should have talked with more members of the team ( set a percentage such as 50 % of the 

 team members we should have talked with ) . 

 - We could have made a questionnaire for all stakeholders to test conﬁrming and disconﬁrming 

 facts . 

 - We could have observed the process of entering and processing the reports . - We could have done more brainstorming to get more ideas . - We need to improve our company culture to allow for minor failures in order to avoid larger 

 failures . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Learning Launch Tool 

 Challenge :    The sales and Quality Assurance ( QA ) people in our company spend a lot of time processing   detailed complaint reports which are required by law . This means the sales people have to   perform a task of entering complaint reports based on data received by customers for which they   are not specialists and that the QA people often have to go back to the sales team with additional   questions about the data entered since often data is mistaken or incomplete in the reports . In   addition the QA people also spend time translating these reports to submit to the head oﬃce   abroad .   These people spend therefore to much time on BVA ( Business Value - Added ) time . We need to   reduce this time so that the two groups can spend more time of real value added time such as   selling products for the sales people . 

 Selection of the learning launch tool :   In order to increase internal process eﬃciency we used the learning launch tool to improve , but as   the video in this course mentions , this should not only be based on assumptions , but fast and   cheap experiments should be performed to test a hypothesis . In this case our customers were   internal stakeholders , no external customers involved , which should actually make the learning   launch tool easier to implement because stakeholders could easily be involved in the testing . 

 Application : 

 State with a hypothesis : 

 Idea   Report automation by using our current online ordering system . Reports could be submitted online by the   sales team . The ordering system already contains part of the information needed for the reports and   therefore part of the data could be pre - populated leading to time eﬃciency and less mistakes ( online error   check ) . Also the system could partially translate the reports automatically . 

 Speciﬁc group of customers   In this case two internal stakeholder groups are the customers : 1 ) Sales people who write and submit reports 

 2 ) Quality Assurance ( QA ) people who process these reports 

 Needs   1 ) Currently spending a long time writing paper reports , scanning this submitting the reports by email . 

 2 ) Since the reports are handwritten by the sales staﬀ , many errors and omissions occur . A pre - check tool   would help . On top of that the QA people need to translate these reports . 

 The idea meets that need :   We need process improvement , involving BVA ( Business Value - Added ) time reductions so that the two   groups can spend more time of real value added time such as selling products for the sales people . 

 Better than the current alternatives   With an online submission system the submissions would be faster because some data can be   automatically retrieved from the system and allowing for automatic error checks . Also there would be no   more need to translate these reports manually . 

 Value creation 	 	  Execution 	  Defendability 	  Scalability 

 time eﬃciency 	 	  project team & 		  approved / buy - in 	  not applicable 

 external vendor 		  during kick - oﬀ 

 based on one test 

 Prioritize key assumptions   - Should lead to process time eﬃciency for sales and QA teams . 

 - Who will do the test : Sales and QA members assigned - How to do the test :    Enter excel sheet template created by QA - Timeframe :                 2 days - Cost :                          None 

 Design Test for Key Assumptions   - Both the sales team and the QA team did separate time calculation prognosis too ﬁnd out how much 

 time could be saved with the new system 

 Do the test   - Result : signiﬁcant time savings 

 Data conﬁrmed based on one test , with minor improvements needed to optimize the plan . 

 Insight gained from applying the tool :   The hypothesis part of the learning launch tool went well but we needed data ( no assumptions   and guesses ) to conﬁrm . The problem is that we have conﬁrmation bias . We would need to go out   and ﬁnd conﬁrming and disconﬁrming facts .   We did talk thoroughly with a limited number of sales and QA people in one - on - one and small   team meetings to go through the hypothesis to ﬁnd out conﬁrming and disconﬁrming facts .   The only experiment we did is go through the process and calculate possible time savings for   both the sales team and the QA team , but we could have done some more testing such as actual   observations to conﬁrm our hypothesis . The learning process was therefore not extensive enough ,    but still suﬃcient . We were able to make some adjustments based on feedback ( optimization to   allow for better results and smoother acceptance ) and get the project approved by the head   oﬃce . 

 Approach :   We have a good core team from various backgrounds working on this project , but what could   have been improved in earlier stages to improve conﬁrmation bias , improve quantity and quality of   data ?   - We did have a kick - oﬀ meeting with everyone involved but we should have done more 

 meetings with all stakeholders in earlier stages . 

 - We should have talked with more members of the team ( set a percentage such as 50 % of the 

 team members we should have talked with ) . 

 - We could have made a questionnaire for all stakeholders to test conﬁrming and disconﬁrming 

 facts . 

 - We could have observed the process of entering and processing the reports . - We could have done more brainstorming to get more ideas . - We need to improve our company culture to allow for minor failures in order to avoid larger 

 failures .
### Output: 