Outline

Outline 7 sections (2,500 từ)

Cấu trúc đề xuất cho báo cáo 2,500 từ + 500 từ Executive Summary. Phân bổ word count tham khảo, có thể flex ±10 %.

Tổng quan

#	Section	Words	Mục tiêu
0	Executive Summary	500	Standalone summary, viết sau cùng
1	Introduction / Context	250	Mitek + ngữ cảnh ops/logistics
2	Problem Statement	200	Vấn đề đo được, evidence
3	Methodology DT/TOC	400	Defend chọn TOC
4	Root Cause Analysis Fishbone	500	6M visual + drill 2-3 nhánh
5	Improvement Plan PDCA	600	Plan/Do/Check/Act với KPI
6	Conclusion + Limitations	250	Tóm tắt + 2-3 limitations
	Total	2,700	(Bù khoảng dao động)

Lưu ý: Executive Summary là phần riêng 500 từ, không tính vào 2,500 từ body. Viết sau khi body xong.

---

Section 1: Introduction / Context (250 từ)

Mục tiêu

Hook reader. Giới thiệu Mitek VN trong global supply chain framing.

Câu mở mẫu (Global SCM framing)

Mitek Vietnam operates as a critical service-supply-chain node within Berkshire’s global engineered-building business, where 3,000+ engineers in Ho Chi Minh City produce structural design specifications that feed downstream truss-and-connector manufacturing facilities across Australia, North America, and Europe. This study examines a process improvement opportunity at the senior-engineering-review stage, a bottleneck in this information supply chain on which downstream manufacturing schedules depend.

Checklist

• Mention course title context (ops + logistics)
• Mitek scale 3,000+ engineers, 26 countries
• Frame Mitek là upstream node trong global supply chain
• Preview thesis: senior review = bottleneck → impact downstream
• Hook bằng số liệu cụ thể

Source materials

• mitek-company · Company knowledge
• process-flow · Workflow context

---

Section 2: Problem Statement (200 từ)

Mục tiêu

1 câu vấn đề + 3-4 câu evidence đo được.

Structure đề xuất

Câu	Nội dung
1	Problem statement 1 câu súc tích
2-3	Evidence quantitative: ratio 15-20:1, queue 2-3 ngày, throughput drop
4	Impact downstream: factory schedule slip, customer reject risk
5	Scope statement: what’s in / what’s out của analysis

Sample wording

The senior-engineering-review stage has emerged as the system constraint at Mitek Vietnam: the junior-to-senior ratio has grown from approximately 3-4:1 to 15-20:1 between 2021 and 2026, lengthening review queues to 2-3 days and reducing weekly throughput despite continuous hiring of junior engineers. This bottleneck propagates downstream, with prefabrication factories in Australia and North America experiencing schedule slippage of up to two days per project. This study scopes the analysis to the senior-review process, excluding upstream spec-intake and downstream factory operations.

Source materials

• senior-review-bottleneck · Detail problem
• Data baseline cần thu thập từ team / anh Tân

---

Section 3: Methodology (400 từ)

Mục tiêu

Giới thiệu TOC và defend lý do chọn TOC over DT.

Structure đề xuất

Sub-section	Words
3.1 Framework selection: TOC vs DT	150
3.2 TOC principle + 5 Focusing Steps	150
3.3 Throughput Accounting + Mitek application	100

Defend choice (key argument)

Vấn đề Mitek senior review là:

• Quantifiable: queue depth, LT, ratio, throughput đều có thể đo
• System constraint, không phải UX issue
• Bottleneck-shaped: 1 step slow hơn các step khác rõ rệt

→ TOC là framework đúng. DT phù hợp với vấn đề “mơ hồ về trải nghiệm khách hàng”, không phải đây.

Câu chuyển sang Section 4

Having identified senior review as the system constraint, the next step is to systematically diagnose root causes using the Ishikawa framework before designing improvement actions via PDCA.

Source materials

• toc-framework · TOC apply
• CH06 - Constraint Management · Theory base
• Watson Blackstone Gardiner 2007 JOM (Q1)

---

Section 4: Root Cause Analysis Fishbone (500 từ)

Mục tiêu

Vẽ Ishikawa 6M, drill 2-3 nhánh sâu nhất.

Structure đề xuất

Sub-section	Words
4.1 Fishbone diagram (figure) + 6M overview	100
4.2 Drill Manpower branch	130
4.3 Drill Method branch (deepest, includes 5 Whys)	170
4.4 Drill Measurement branch	100

Figure must-have

Fishbone diagram chuẩn export từ Lucidchart/Miro/draw.io. Centered head “Senior review queue dài 50+ drawings”. 6 bones với drill 2-3 level.

Key root cause to surface

Method branch → 5 Whys → Không có self-check checklist standard, chưa ai owner.

Đây là operational root cause, có thể fix bằng PDCA. Manpower (ratio scaling) là structural, không thể fix trong 90 ngày.

Câu chuyển sang Section 5

The Ishikawa analysis surfaces the absence of a self-check checklist as the most actionable root cause, alongside structural manpower constraints. The PDCA cycle in the next section operationalises these findings through a 12-week pilot.

Source materials

• fishbone · Apply
• CH03 - Quality and Performance · Fishbone theory
• Ishikawa 1985

---

Section 5: Improvement Plan PDCA (600 từ)

Mục tiêu

Plan/Do/Check/Act đầy đủ với KPI cụ thể, owner, timeline 12 tuần.

Structure đề xuất

Sub-section	Words
5.1 Plan (Week 1-2): baseline + target	120
5.2 Do (Week 3-8): pilot self-check + triage	200
5.3 Check (Week 9-10): dashboard + measure	100
5.4 Act (Week 11-12): standardize + cycle 2	180

Bảng skeleton

Xem pdca-plan cho table đầy đủ.

Key elements per phase

Phase	Must-have
Plan	SMART KPI, baseline measurement, target -40 % LT in 90d
Do	Pilot scope (1 market team), checklist artifact, triage rules
Check	Weekly dashboard, statistical test vs baseline
Act	Standardize SOP, train rollout team, identify next bottleneck

Câu chuyển sang Section 6

While the proposed PDCA cycle is designed to deliver a 40 % reduction in review lead time, several limitations and assumptions warrant explicit acknowledgement.

Source materials

• pdca-plan · Detail table
• CH04 - Lean Systems · PDCA theory
• Deming 1986

---

Section 6: Conclusion + Limitations (250 từ)

Mục tiêu

2-3 limitations + reflection. Markers thích self-critique.

Structure đề xuất

Element	Words
Tóm tắt findings 3-4 dòng	60
Limitations (2-3)	120
Future research / next cycle	50
Closing line	20

Limitations đề xuất

1. Data baseline estimate: chưa access dashboard chính thức của Mitek, dữ liệu queue depth là estimate từ stakeholder.
2. Single bottleneck assumption: TOC assume 1 constraint, nhưng Mitek có thể có multi-constraint (senior + CAD license + customer review handoff).
3. Generalizability: Mitek timber-frame design BPO model specific, transferable yếu sang manufacturing pure-play.

Closing line đề xuất

By treating senior review not as a quality bottleneck to defend but as a system constraint to systematically elevate, Mitek Vietnam can convert organisational scale from a liability into a competitive advantage in the global engineered-building market.

---

Section 0: Executive Summary (500 từ, viết SAU CÙNG)

Mục tiêu

Standalone document. Reader chỉ đọc Exec Summary cũng hiểu toàn bộ.

Structure đề xuất

Element	Words
Context (Mitek + scope)	80
Problem statement	70
Methodology summary	80
Key root cause findings	90
Improvement plan summary	120
Expected outcome + limitations	60

Writing tip

Viết sau cùng. Đọc lại body, extract sentence đầu mỗi section, smooth thành flow. Không copy-paste section openings.

---

Phân công công việc

Role	Section	Words	Profile member
HIGH WEIGHT	Section 3 + 4	~900	System-thinking, quant, hoặc kinh nghiệm Mitek
MEDIUM	Section 5 PDCA	~600	Ops execution / PM experience
SUPPORT	Section 1 + 2 + 6	~700	Writing + Mitek context
LAST	Executive Summary	500	Member làm Section 5 consolidate format + Harvard refs

Timeline đề xuất

Date	Milestone
14/05 (Thứ 4)	Đồng ý outline + phân công
15/05 (Thứ 5)	Draft Section 1-2-3 done
16/05 (Thứ 6)	Draft Section 4-5 done
17/05 sáng	Section 6 + Exec Summary + Harvard cite check + Studiosity
17/05 23:00	Submit Turnitin
17/05 23:30	Submit FeedbackFruits peer eval
17/05 23:59	Hard deadline

Liên quan

• index · MOC
• de-bai · Requirements
• khung-ly-thuyet · Framework theory
• pdca-plan · Section 5 detail
• references-q1 · 15 Harvard refs