Case StudiesCASE STUDY

Indications are directly inputted on deliverables with comment function of Excel and Word

The reviewers used Excel and Word commenting functions to fill in the findings in the deliverables.
The recording of the indication and the confirmation of the correction result were carried out by this method.
Therefore, in order to further improve the level, we thought of doing a "review review" with the aim of growing the person in charge and improving the process.

Uable to retrospect reviews without creating a list of indications, which is a burden on the site

In order to ensure that "where" the problem lies in the deliverables, the comments function, which allows direct writing in the deliverables, was used to record the points.
While it is easy to convey the problem areas pointed out in the comments, there is a problem that it is not possible to analyze them using the classification information and the number of cases pointed out for the following reasons, and it cannot be used in the "review review" that is implemented to improve the skills of the person in charge and improve the development process.
・Unable to record information to classify indications
・Unable to tabulate the number of issues identified

It was not possible to analyze the comments using the classification information and the number of issues, because it was not possible to record information to classify the issues and to tabulate the number of issues.
Therefore, it was necessary to create a list of indications to which indication classification information was added every time the patient looked back.
This listing process became a heavy burden for the field, and the field avoided "review review".

Analyses based on the indications can be performed immediately at any time while accurately conveying indications

We were able to list the indications with executing reviews, that enabled us to retrospect timely

Since the location of the indication can be expressed on the image, it is now possible to record the indication as if it were a comment function.
　・Information for classifying indications can also be recorded during the review, and indications can be listed as the review proceeds
　・Analysis based on the indicated information can be performed immediately at any time, and review can be performed in a timely manner.

Data collection, analysis, and problem extraction became easy, and the review became active.
　・Review activities and team weaknesses can be noticed and improved through review.
　・Improvement activities become more active as new perspectives are often noticed.

Good	It seems that the defect removal rate (whether the indication is fully detected in the process) is high. The results of your review activities are showing.
Change	It's hard to reduce the number of typos, omissions, and legibility points. Even if you install a calibration tool, a certain number of them will be found. I wonder why...?
Change	Due to the replacement of members, the number of process violations pointed out seems to have increased. Consider automating the education and checking of design standards.