GAP ANALYSIS

for POOR PERFORMANCE

on T3e PROJECT
for
REDTONE ENGINEERING & NETWORK
SERVICES SDN BHD

T3e PROJECT DIVISION

Prepared By: Nithya Rajasagaran

Designation: Head, Support & Maintenance
Date: 23 March 2020

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary
2. Background
i. About RENS
ii. T3e Project Overview
3. Problem Question
4. Objectives
5. Methodology
i. Analytical Framework
ii. Tools
iii. Data Collection Methods
6. Timeline
7. Findings
8. Proposed Recommendations
9. Key Takeaways
10. Project Impact
11. Conclusion
12. Consultant Profile
13. References
14. List of Table & Diagrams

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REDtone Engineering & Network Sdn Bhd (RENS) has been facing many challenges in ACHIEVING
and MAINTAINING the performance Key Performance Index (KPI) and Service Level Agreement
(SLA) of 95% service availability and 3 days response time for the Malaysian Communications and
Multimedia Commission’s (MCMC) Universal Service Provider (USP) T3e project.
RENS has received 2 warning letters and now at a risk for a 10% penalty of the total operations
expenses or a total revocation of the project.
This report contains an analysis of gaps that are affecting RENS’s performance. The organization
has been reporting an average of 93% site availability and takes an average of 5 days to restore
faults. The contractual agreement is 95% site availability and 3 days to restore faults.

Source: Redtone Annual Performance Report (Jan – Feb 2019)

Problem Question
What are the GAPS in the 3 MAIN COMPONENTS that are contributing to the poor performance
for T3e Project?

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Objective
To identify the gaps and contributing factors that are affecting RENS’s poor performance.

Methodologies
1. Framework: Six Sigma
2. Tool: Fish Bone Diagram
3. Data Collection Methods:
a. Document Analysis
b. Interview

Timeline

Findings

❖ System limitations has proven to have major cause for poor performance, and not likely
to be fixed due to additional cost.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 ❖ It is noted that organizing the system has low impact to the performance and would be
easier to fix.
❖ Analysis on People factors proved that they have major impact for poor performance but
3 out of the 4 elements are fixable.
❖ Behavioral issues came in as major impact and not easy to fix.
❖ Process has the least cause for poor performance and can be somewhat easily fixed.

Recommendations

1. System Upgrade – To be fully automated to increase efficiency.

2. Recruit manpower to overcome the shortage of manpower and to eliminate the possible
behavioral issues due to overworking.
3. To provide training to ensure employees are competent to carry out their tasks.
4. To alter the current process flow to comply with MCMC’s MSQOS.

Conclusion

1. PROCESSES are DEPENDENT on People & Systems and vice versa.

2. All 3 components need to be ENHANCED in order to achieve & maintain the set KPI by
MCMC.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

BACKGROUND
REDtone Engineering & Network Sdn Bhd (RENS) is a subsidiary under REDtone
Telecomunications, specializing in engineering deployment services. RENS main projects include
Universal Service Provider (USP) tenders from the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia
Commission (MCMC).
The tender specifications are the deployment and maintenance of telecommunications towers
to rural areas, namely the Time 3 projects (T3e) for a project tenure of 3 years.
The project scope includes maintaining service availability of all sites at the set Service Level
Agreement of 95%. Measurement of the said SLA are pro-active monitoring, fault escalation and
service restoration within the stipulated timeframe of 3 days in accordance to the Mandatory
Standards for Quality of Service (MSQoS) under the Commission Determination of the
Multimedia & Communication Act 1998.

RENS has been served with 2 warning letters, dated May 2019 and January 2020, for non-
compliance of service performance. Both the letters have been responded to with justification
and evidence on delayed response time but MCMC has verbally warned the organization that
this may be the last straw before they are served with a third warning letter, 10% penalty from
total operating expenses for the non-performance sites or even worse, a total revocation of the
project.

Current Performance

The initial findings gathered from the Network Operations Center, shows that RENS has been
reporting a 93% site availability with an average of 5 days for restoration, which is breaching the
service performance agreement signed by the organization.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

From the findings based on the root cause analysis done by the RENS NOC team, we are able to
categorize the 4 main contributing factors that are impacting the performance.

access issues
6%

systems
33%
process
33%

people
28%
systems people process access issues

Diagram 1: Contributing Factors to Poor Performance in RENS (Jan-Dec 2019)

Source: Redtone Annual Performance Report (Jan-Dec 2019)

From the high-level analysis above, we observed that the factors are divided to internal factors
and external factors.
Internal Factors are factors and challenges that the organization can control and adjust or
change. These are:
1. People
❖ Human behavior
❖ Attitude
❖ Skill Competency
❖ Manpower

2. Process
❖ Fault Escalation Process Flow

3. System
❖ Monitoring System
❖ Ticketing System

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

External factors are challenges and obstacles that cannot be controlled and is caused by an
external force beyond human control. This is:
1. Access Issue
❖ Landslide
❖ Flood
❖ Heavy Rain
❖ Damaged roads
As such, the analysis will focus on identifying the gaps on the internal factors that are causing
the poor performance.

Problem Question

What are the GAPS in the 3 MAIN COMPONENTS that are contributing to the poor performance
for T3e Project?

Objectives

To ANALYSE the current Process & System for the identification of gaps that are
causing the delay in restoration & poor performance.

To IDENTIFY the different contributing factors & challenges faced by the team that
is causing them to miss the 3 days window for restoration.

To provide RECOMMENDATIONS to eliminate the GAPS in the 3 major components.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Project Scope
1. Document Analysis on reports, process and data collected to identify the challenges and
factors that are affecting performance.
❖ Reports that will be analyzed are:
i. The Fault Escalation Process
ii. Weekly Performance Report (Jan-Feb 2020)
iii. Yearly Performance Report (Jan-Dec 2019)
iv. 2 Non-Compliance respond reports submitted to MCMC dated 2 July 2019
& 3 Feb 2020)

2. Interviews with selected respondents that are directly involved with the project to gather
thoughts, insights and challenges contributing to the poor performance.

3. Findings from the analysis.

4. Proposed recommendation from the findings for the organization to implement and
action on.

Timeline
Week 1: 10 February 2020 – 15 February 2020
1. Pre-liminary collection of data to understand the organization’s background and the
problem.
2. Researching of framework and tools that will best fit the analysis to be carried out.
3. Identified the framework and tool to be used for the analysis:
❖ Framework: Six Sigma
❖ Tool: Fish Bone Diagram
Week 2: 16 February 20202 – 20 February 2020

1. Carried out interviews with the 5 selected respondents to understand the challenges
faced and to identify factors that are contributing to the challenges.
2. Gathered the required reports from the NOC team for data analysis.
3. Verified the data with the NOC team, on accuracy of the reports, the manner it was
generated and prepared.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Week 3: 21 February 2020 –7 March 22020
1. Analysis on the data acquired from the interview sessions and reports.

Week 5: 8 March 2020 – 21 March 2020

1. Started compilation of the final report.
2. Checked the analysis for data accuracy.

Week 7: 23 March 2020

1. Preparation for final report presentation and submission to RENS.

Diagram 2: Project Timeline

Source: Author’s Own

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

METHODOLOGIES
Framework – SIX SIGMA
Framework is a guided frame, that outlines the scope of work and its categories that needs to be
carried out during an analysis process. The initial outline is the most important for qualitative
data analysis (Nicola K Gale, 2013), as it determines the theme and pattern of the analysis.
For this project, we decided to use the Six Sigma framework.
What is Six Sigma?

Six Sigma is a framework for quality improvement. Its main objective is to design and systematize
a process or processes in order to eliminate defects and inefficiency. It was originally invented by
Motorola, USA in the year 19806 and It has now become popular in the corporate world due to
its effectiveness and proficiency. (What is Six Sigma , 2019)
The framework consists of 5 key action principle that is used as a guide to manage change. DMAIC
is an abbreviation of the action principles and it comprises of; Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve
and Control. All the DMAIC process steps are required and always proceed in the given order.
(Keller, 2001)
1. Define design goals that are consistent with customer demands and the enterprise
strategy.
2. Measure key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data; calculate the
'as-is' Process Capability.
3. Analyze the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships. Determine
what the relationships are and attempt to ensure that all factors have been
considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation.
4. Improve or optimize the current process based upon data analysis using techniques
such as design of experiments, mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new,
future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability.
5. Control the future state process to ensure that any deviations from the target are
corrected before they result in defects. Implement control systems such as statistical
process control, production boards, visual workplaces, and continuously monitor the
process. This process is repeated until the desired quality level is obtained.

(Definition extracted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma)

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Why Six Sigma?
❖ It is a data-driven improvement cycle used for improving, optimizing and stabilizing
business processes and designs.

❖ It was created for the MAIN PURPOSE of designing and systematizing a process in order
to ELIMINATE defects and inefficiency.

❖ It is the most suitable framework for the gap analysis for RENS as it covers all aspects of
the analysis.

Who uses Six Sigma?

Many organizations have adapted to the Six Sigma as the way for business improvement and
quality management. Six Sigma aims to give incomparable performance, high value and
extremely reliable products or services to its target customers, hence it has become a culture in
many organizations starting from the top – bottom.

Globally, there are many organizations that have adapted to the Six Sigma way such as Motorola,
Ericson, General Electric, 3M, Amazon, Atos, Bank of America & Becton Dickinson. (Turner, 2019)

In Malaysia, TM One, Maxis, Royal Malaysia Navy, Sime Darby, CIMB Bank are the first few
companies to implement the Six Sigma framework for business and quality improvement and
management.

Below is the framework built using Six Sigma for RENS Gaps Analysis.

Diagram 3: RENS Six Sigma Framework

Source: Author’s Own

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Tool– FISH BONE DIAGRAM
Tools are used to analyse data effectively. There are many tools out there used for brainstorming,
but the most popular one is the Fish Bone Diagram.

What is Fish Bone Diagram?

Known as the Ishikawa diagram, named after the creator himself, Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, is a diagram
that show the causes of a specific event. (FIRICAN, 2018)

Common uses of the FISH BONE DIAGRAM are product design and quality defect prevention to
identify potential factors causing an overall effect. Each cause or reason for imperfection is a
source of variation. Causes are usually grouped into major categories to identify and classify
these sources of variation. (FIRICAN, 2018)

Why use the Fish Bone Diagram?

❖ This tool is efficient for outlining the gaps and its contributing factors.
❖ Easier to analyze a complex problem when there are many causes.
❖ Able to uncover bottlenecks and identify where and why a process doesn't work.

Who Uses the Fish Bone Diagram?

❖ TOYOTA – for The Toyota Production System (TPS) between 1948 and 1975.
❖ MAZDA– for the development Miata (MX5) sports car in 1989.
❖ KAWASAKI – for the quality management process for shipyard in 1960.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 Diagram 4: Fishbone type cause-and-effect diagram
Source: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram#/media/File:Ishikawa_Fishbone_Diagram.svg, n.d.

The diagram is made of a skeleton of a fish, hence the name Fish Bone Diagram. The head
defines the problem statement (effect) and the skeleton of bones are filled with causes,
challenges and contributing factors for each main bone (category).
This tool allows for broader ideas on causes as we keep answering the question; why? This will
then lead to noting down all the contributing factors to the causes.
Data gathered on the Fish Bone diagram is easier to analyse but can be overwhelming with too
much data.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

DATA COLLECTION METHOD
Document Analysis
Document analysis is a method of analyzing all the data acquired by using the right tools to
generate an outlook of the data in hand. This is an important process in this project as the data
contributed to the findings of the gaps.
Types of documents that were analyzed are:
❖ The Fault Escalation Process
❖ Weekly Performance Report (Jan-Feb 2020)
❖ Yearly Performance Report (Jan-Dec 2019)
❖ 2 Non-Compliance respond reports submitted to MCMC dated 2 July 2019 & 3 Feb
2020)
The reports above were provided by the Network Operation Center as these reports are
generated and prepared by them.
These reports were selected to be used for the data analysis because these are the same reports
that MCMC used to measure the performance of RENS prior to the issuance of the 2 warning
letters. Hence, it was critical that these were accurate and concurrent with the data submitted
to MCMC.
Verification of the reports were done by comparing the report prepared against the NOC ticketing
system, for key information reported.

Interview
Before conducting the interview to gather more data, selection criteria was built with the client
to ensure the respondents interviewed was worthy to the project.

Selection Criteria Justification

Permanent employees of To ensure accountability and credibility in the responses

the company. provided.

Directly involved with T3e ❖ Must be experts and hands on in managing the
Project Management & project daily.
Operations.
❖ Must know the challenges faced.

❖ Must be involved with liaising with MCMC.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 Minimum 3 years with ❖ T3e Project has been operating for 3 years (2017 –
organization. present)
❖ Must know the history of the project & its initial
arrangements.

Managerial level Due to time constraints of the project duration, the client
has requested to acquire responses from the managerial
levels only.

Final Respondents

Diagram 5: Final Respondents

Source: Author’s own.

From the simplified diagram above, below are the details of the 5 final respondents that were
interviewed for this project.
1. Tan Kee Ann, General Manager Operations (RENS)
Work Experience in RENS: 20 Years
Responsibilities:
❖ Project Infrastructure Planning, Deployment Process, Project Delivery &
Operations Management.
❖ Manages the workforce for this project.
❖ Key decision maker on commercial solutions for the project.
❖ Liaison for MCMC for project progress and updates.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 2. Ong Cheok Seong, General Manager, Network & Infrastructure Operations (Redtone)
Work Experience in Redtone: 16 Years
Responsibilities:
❖ Network Monitoring systems for the project.
❖ Network planning and setup for the project.
❖ Manages workforce for Customer Care and NOC.
❖ Operations management for the project; support and maintenance.
❖ Liaison for MCMC for network compliance matters.

3. Prisceleda Harilal, Team Leader NOC (Redtone)

Work Experience in Redtone: 8 Years
Responsibilities:
❖ Pro-active monitoring of all sites.
❖ Rightful escalation for faults.
❖ Preparation of reports to MCMC.
❖ Ensuring maintenance of the sites are in accordance to the MCMC’s
MSQOS.
❖ Liaison for MCMC for support and reporting of all sites.

4. Roy Lee, Operations Head, Sarawak (RENS)

Work Experience in Redtone: 13 Years
Responsibilities:
❖ Management of all 73 sites in Sarawak.
❖ Management of ground staff and contractors.
❖ Sites management: ensuring the ground staff is equipped with the right
tools to maintain and repair the sites when required.
❖ Primary liaison for MCMC Sarawak.

5. Stanly Thomas, Operations Head, Sabah (RENS)

Work Experience in Redtone: 10 Years
Responsibilities:
❖ Management of Sabah sites and a portion of sites in Miri, Sarawak.
❖ Management of ground staff and contractors.
❖ Sites management: ensuring the ground staff is equipped with the right
tools to maintain and repair the sites when required.
❖ Primary liaison for MCMC Sabah.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

The interview with the respondents will be carried out via:

❖ For 3 respondents in Redtone headquarters.

❖ For 2 respondents in Sabah & Sarawak branch offices.

Each session will be for 45 minutes as it was requested by the client to keep the conversation in
this time frame.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

FINDINGS
PROCESS

Diagram 6: Service Level Agreement for the restoration time of T3e Project
Source: Redtone NOC Fault Escalation Process

Diagram 6 above is the contracted restoration time according to severity levels of the fault
occurred.
Diagram 7 below is the current process flow designed by the NOC team for fault escalation.
Based on the analysis conducted against the contracted service level agreement, the process flow
indicates several gaps that is hindering the team from achieving the 3 days restoration period.
Gaps identified are:
1. 1 Hour to identify the type of alarm.
❖ This causes delay in escalation and when there is delay from the start, it collapses
the entire process.
❖ The system should automatically indicate the type of alarms instead of the team
having to identify them by sorting out the alarms manually.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 2. The escalation goes back to the NOC team after 48 hours of escalation, to the
power/genset team, in the event the troubleshooting on site determines that it is not a
power failure.
❖ The process flow then goes back to a whole 74 hours, instead of being
shortened.
❖ This is a redundant site deployment and causes more delays in site restoration.

3. The entire process flow from start to finish takes 76 hours instead of 72 hours.
❖ This is a clear indication of the misunderstanding of the project agreement and
the inability to commit to the contracted timelines.

ESCALATION PROCESS FLOW

1 Hour

1 Hour

48 Hours

2 Hours

YES
72 Hours

YES

Diagram 7: Fault Escalation Process for T3e Project

Source: Redtone NOC Fault Escalation Process

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Summary:
The gaps are categorized below from the analysis of the process flow as below and rated with:
❖ How likely is this cause to be the major source of the issue?

❖ V - Very Likely
❖ S - Somewhat Likely
❖ N - Not Likely

❖ How easy would it be to fix or control?

❖ V - Very Easy
❖ S - Somewhat Easy
❖ N - Not Easy

Table 1: Results for Process

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Factors that are somewhat easy to fix:
VV: Flow Mechanism
❖ Major impact to the operations but somewhat easy to fix because this is alteration on
the process, document improvement.

Factors that are somewhat easy to fix:

VS: Feasibility, Efficiency, Productivity

❖ After improving the document, the execution of the process is highly dependent on
People & System.
❖ For the process to be feasible in timeline, the operations team must have sufficient
manpower to meet the required restoration time.
❖ Efficiency and productivity are highly dependent on system and people too.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

SYSTEM AND PEOPLE

Diagram 8: FISH BONE DIAGRAM on Process & System Analysis

Source: Author’s own

Using the Fish Bone Diagram, all the root causes were mapped out according to 2 major
components, System and People. The causes were acquired from the document analysis and
respondent feedback during the interview.
Gaps identified is summarized in the table below by prioritizing the causes to determine which
are having the largest effect.
The categories are then rated from the analysis with:
❖ How likely is this cause to be the major source of the issue?

❖ V - Very Likely
❖ S - Somewhat Likely
❖ N - Not Likely
❖ How easy would it be to fix or control?

❖ V - Very Easy
❖ S - Somewhat Easy
❖ N - Not Easy

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

PEOPLE

Table 2: Results for People

Summary:
Factors that are easily fixed:
VV: Manpower

❖ Manpower is a major factor to delays in restoration, but it easily fixed by the

management.

SV: Skill competency

❖ Both field engineers and NOC support require more training, and this can be easily fixed
by the management.

Factors that are somewhat easily fixed:

SS: Behavioral related issues
❖ Variety of other factors contributed to behavioral issues such as overworked due to
insufficient manpower and poor understanding on the knowledge required.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 ❖ This are not easily fixed as it is dependent on other factors but can be fixed once the
manpower issue is sorted and training is provided.

Factors that are not easily fixed:

VN: Attitude
❖ Even though the other factors and caused are fixed, changing someone’s attitude is not
something that can be done by the management.
❖ This is an individual and personal change.
❖ Counseling may help, but there are no guarantees.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

SYSTEM

Table 3: Results for System

Summary:
Factors that are not easily fixed:

VN: Manual, Limited Features and Efficiency

❖ Major impact to the delay in restoration.
❖ The system needs to function accurately for the team to correctly escalate the faults.
❖ Major change to the system’s algorithm, time consuming and incurs additional cost.
❖ It is however very important to get it fixed so that this factor is eliminated from the cause
of poor performance.
❖ System is the core to managing the operations, and if this is in place, the process and
people will follow.

Factors that are somewhat easy to fix:

SS: Organization

❖ Can be fixed with minor impact to the process and company.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

 ❖ Not a major impact but still a factor for delay.

Overall Findings Summary

Table 4: Results Summary for System, People & Process

1. System limitations have proven to have major cause for poor performance, and not likely to be
fixed due to additional cost.
2. It is noted that organizing the system has low impact to the performance and would be easier to fix
3. Analysis on People factors proved that they have major impact for poor performance but 3 out of
the 4 elements are fixable.
4. Behavioral issues came in as major impact and not easy to fix.
5. Process has the least cause for poor performance and can be somewhat easily fixed.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

Respondent Feedback

Table 5: Respondent Feedback

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION

Table 6: Proposed Recommendations

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

PROJECT IMPACT

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

CONCLUSION

Diagram 9: SYSTEM, PROCESS, PEOPLE DEPENDENCY

1. PROCESS is DEPENDENT on People & Systems and vice versa.

2. All 3 components need to be ENHANCED in order to achieve & maintain the set KPI by
MCMC.

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

CONSULTANT PROFILE

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

REFERENCES
FIRICAN, G. (2018). How to use the fishbone diagram to determine data quality root causes. Retrieved
from LightsonData: https://www.lightsondata.com/how-to-fishbone-diagram-data-quality-root-
causes/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram#/media/File:Ishikawa_Fishbone_Diagram.svg. (n.d.).
Retrieved from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram#/media/File:Ishikawa_Fishbone_Diagram.svg.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma.

Keller, P. A. (2001). Six Sigma Deployment: A Guide for Implementing Six Sigma in Your Organizatio.
Tucson, AZ: Quality Publishing.

Nicola K Gale, G. H. (2013). Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-
disciplinary health research. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13.

NOC, R. (2019). Redtone Annual Performance Report (Jan-Dec 2019). Redtone.

Turner, L. (2019). Six Sigma Methodd. Retrieved from https://blog.masterofproject.com/six-sigma-

method/: https://blog.masterofproject.com/six-sigma-method/

What is Six Sigma . (2019). Retrieved from What is Six Sigma : https://www.whatissixsigma.net/what-is-
six-sigma-used-for/

Gap Analysis Report for RENS

LIST OF DIAGRAMS & TABLES
Diagram 1: Contributing Factors to Poor Performance in RENS (Jan-Dec 2019)
Diagram 2: Project Timeline
Diagram 3: RENS Six Sigma Framework
Diagram 4: Fishbone type cause-and-effect diagram
Diagram 5: Final Respondents
Diagram 6: Service Level Agreement for the restoration time of T3e Project
Diagram 7: Fault Escalation Process for T3e Project
Diagram 8: FISH BONE DIAGRAM on Process & System Analysis
Diagram 9: SYSTEM, PROCESS, PEOPLE DEPENDENCY
Table 1: Results for Process
Table 2: Results for People
Table 3: Results for System
Table 4: Results Summary for System, People & Process
Table 5: Respondent Feedback
Table 6: Proposed Recommendations

Gap Analysis Report for RENS