In my company , and I suspect most other large companies the “ buying stuff ” procedure is   cumbersome , detailed , and not very effective . At least in my company the process is focused on   financial needs and controls . The sad story is that the same control mechanisms that are put in place   to control a purchase , is the same that prevent the process to be efficient . The need for control led to   professional buyers in the company , buyers that no longer had any knowledge of what was bought ,   only how . 

 It was easy to identify issues with the current approach , e.g. there was no link between the order and   whether the order was received or was as expected , as it was the professional buyer that was asked   if the gods were received . In a complex time and material project this would be an impossible task to   answer for the professional buyer . Similar when buying services as “ application operation ” . Did we   get it ? Did we buy the right thing ? When you do n’t know what you are buying , there is no   improvement process either . 

 Having identified the challenge , the next step was to bring senior management on - board . The tool   for this was visualization . The current process was drawn on a whiteboard using pictures , figures ,   paper copies , sticky notes and whiteboard markers , and then the different use cases was played on   top of the process , revealing the lack of control in all of them . In the end senior management agreed ,   there was no real control , and that something had to be done . 

 The main strength of the overlaying Use Case walkthrough of the process visualizations was of curse   to visualize the short comings of the existing process . However , the process also gave a solid   foundation into focusing on the what to change . The senior management were able to communicate   what was important and what was not , and new roles and responsibilities were tried out “ on the fly ” .   Some were discarded , and some kept . 

 In the end the workshop based on the visualization gave two main improvements to the process .   First of all , a role called requestor was identified . The requestor is the person who actually has a   need . The requestor is defining the item to purchase , and is also the recipient of the item . This role   took over some of the responsibility from buyer ( from sourcing ) , first among them the responsibility   of receiving the goods and determine if it is actually received . Secondly we were able to build a   forecast , predicting incoming invoices simply by changing simple parameters as max value on an   order , instead of estimated values ( which were not honoured ) . 

 Also other approaches were tried out to test changes . Templates and reports were created in order   to guide and help in the process . Reports that proved helpful were continued , a few that did not   change the way of work were discontinued . 

 Overall the visualization was organized as a workshop with senior management . The problem   statement was accepted prior to the workshop , and the visualization tools with the overlay of Use   cases was selected as a communication tool . The process allowed senior management to understand   the issue , guide in problem solving and the project team to get first - hand experience in priorities . 

 If I were to run the same process again , I would keep the main structure , but set up a second   workshop where more Use Cases and possible solutions were tested against the process . 


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: In my company , and I suspect most other large companies the “ buying stuff ” procedure is   cumbersome , detailed , and not very effective . At least in my company the process is focused on   financial needs and controls . The sad story is that the same control mechanisms that are put in place   to control a purchase , is the same that prevent the process to be efficient . The need for control led to   professional buyers in the company , buyers that no longer had any knowledge of what was bought ,   only how . 

 It was easy to identify issues with the current approach , e.g. there was no link between the order and   whether the order was received or was as expected , as it was the professional buyer that was asked   if the gods were received . In a complex time and material project this would be an impossible task to   answer for the professional buyer . Similar when buying services as “ application operation ” . Did we   get it ? Did we buy the right thing ? When you do n’t know what you are buying , there is no   improvement process either . 

 Having identified the challenge , the next step was to bring senior management on - board . The tool   for this was visualization . The current process was drawn on a whiteboard using pictures , figures ,   paper copies , sticky notes and whiteboard markers , and then the different use cases was played on   top of the process , revealing the lack of control in all of them . In the end senior management agreed ,   there was no real control , and that something had to be done . 

 The main strength of the overlaying Use Case walkthrough of the process visualizations was of curse   to visualize the short comings of the existing process . However , the process also gave a solid   foundation into focusing on the what to change . The senior management were able to communicate   what was important and what was not , and new roles and responsibilities were tried out “ on the fly ” .   Some were discarded , and some kept . 

 In the end the workshop based on the visualization gave two main improvements to the process .   First of all , a role called requestor was identified . The requestor is the person who actually has a   need . The requestor is defining the item to purchase , and is also the recipient of the item . This role   took over some of the responsibility from buyer ( from sourcing ) , first among them the responsibility   of receiving the goods and determine if it is actually received . Secondly we were able to build a   forecast , predicting incoming invoices simply by changing simple parameters as max value on an   order , instead of estimated values ( which were not honoured ) . 

 Also other approaches were tried out to test changes . Templates and reports were created in order   to guide and help in the process . Reports that proved helpful were continued , a few that did not   change the way of work were discontinued . 

 Overall the visualization was organized as a workshop with senior management . The problem   statement was accepted prior to the workshop , and the visualization tools with the overlay of Use   cases was selected as a communication tool . The process allowed senior management to understand   the issue , guide in problem solving and the project team to get first - hand experience in priorities . 

 If I were to run the same process again , I would keep the main structure , but set up a second   workshop where more Use Cases and possible solutions were tested against the process .
### Output: 