What is the most under-rated, or over-rated, quality tool or technique?

[ben]

Most over-used: Kaizen. Poor charters and inexperienced facilitators. Everytime something goes wrong, we have to have a week-long kaizen with maybe a visioning event.

Most mis-used: SPC charts. Typically used as a "report card", not to drive improvement.

Most under-used: Operational definitions.

As for Six Sigma, my trainer told me that 90% of all problems can be solved with Pareto charts, cause-and-effects diagrams and FMEAs/Control Plans. But he also taught me about DOE, Evops, and RSM

[Wes Bucey]

In Reply to Parent Post by jmp4429

I think this may depend on whether your priority as a company is looking at economically sensible improvement, or attempting to avoid dismembering anyone or really pi$$ing off a customer!

Nobody gets dismembered or hurt. ALL FMEA "fixes" are done in the planning stage BEFORE any product is made. Obviously the economics of sending out a product that can chop off a head requires fixing (preventing) it or finding a way to detect it BEFORE it goes out the door. I don't mind raising the blood pressure of an idiot customer who wants paperwork and has no idea how to use it once he has it. I just make sure he PAYS for anything extra in meaningless drivel.

I don't see FMEA so much as "improvement" since I use it BEFORE I make a product as part of creating the PROCESS to make a product, but as "mistake proofing" BEFORE the mistakes occur. FMEA (I pronounce it "fee muh") is just kind of a neat acronym as opposed to "TBPPIP" (Think Before Putting Product in Production") ["tub pip"?]

[Bev D]

most under rated: multi-vari. Leonard Seder developed an elegant non mathematical method that is phenomenally statistically sound. it shows everything about the variation of the process Intuitive for everybody from managers to operators. I use it as a first step in problem solving, to determine rational sub grouping for control charts, as my baseline approach for capability studies...

most over rated: fishbone diagrams. lots of work, lots of guessing and rarely helps effectively to get to root cause...there are simply better tools to get you to root cause quicker with less work. at least in my experience....

as for the six sigma bashing: haven't we been down that road enough? this could be a useful discussion on specific tools and methods, instead we've already started the useless bitter arguments about the pros and cons of six sigma - my suggestion is either read the gazillions of previous posts on the topic if you can't get over your obsession with six sigma (either pro or con) OR start a new thread to rehash; but let's not hijack this thread.

[Paul Simpson]

Great thread. The problem is not overuse of any tool. In any given situation any of the tools people have had a go at above can have their use, it is more the improper use of tools. The problem - like all things - is if the object of the organization is to have a "tick in the box" that says we have X or Y, instead of taking the time to understand what the issue is and what tool can provide the solution.

The posts on leadership have it right. If you have leaders (at whatever level in the organization) who do not understand the tool but require its use you end up with a tool that is misapplied.

From my point of view I love the object of 6 sigma but hate all of the hype that surrounds it. There is no question that some organizations have had huge benefits from the set of tools and others have had the huge costs of implementaion with litle or no contribution to the bottom line.

[Tim Folkerts]

Paul's post describes what I was thinking when I created by signature.

The proper tool for the proper use in the proper setting will empower you to effectively solve problems. Change any one of these factors - tool, use, or setting - and the ability to accomplish the task goes down.

The value of this thread is to remind each other about some of our favorite tools. Perhaps we ought to also describe the how we use the tools and what our circumstances are.

It is like asking a carpenter which tools he overuses. If you are framing houses, you could go years without touching a router, but a cabinet maker might well use a router every day. On the other hand, a carpenter who has never heard of a router (or perhaps just forget about the usefulness of a router) is limited in the types or projects that can be effectively tackled.

Six Sigma is a good case in point. A full-blown, formal DMAIC approach is the right tool for some problems. Proper use of DMAIC can empower you to solve certain challenging problems effectively. When you turn around and try to force Six Sigma to solve problems for which it is not suited. By focusing on the tool, not the task, the tool has become the master.

Tim F

[Bev D]

In Reply to Parent Post by Paul Simpson

The problem is not overuse of any tool. In any given situation any of the tools people have had a go at above can have their use, it is more the improper use of tools. The problem - like all things - is if the object of the organization is to have a "tick in the box" that says we have X or Y, instead of taking the time to understand what the issue is and what tool can provide the solution.

True that no tool that is properly used (ala Tim's subsequent posting) is overused. (after all they dont' wear out!)

Howver, the question was over rated and under rated. Which again goes to Tim's point of reminding of each other and/or ponting out what's available. I do like the idea of describing why a particular tool works in appropriate situations and why certain tools - which are inappropriately or inefficently used - are not the best choice.

[Rob Nix]

Earlier, Wes Bucey asked why I listed FMEA (in its current format) as over-rated. Since the answer is long and deviates somewhat from the general topic here, I started a new thread:

http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread....445#post116445

[M Greenaway]

Lets throw lean manufacturing into the mix with the over-rated tools/techniques, in particular I guess would be value stream mapping.

Why - because it creates short sighted cost reduction as a priority and devalues any activity which 'the customer would not pay for', and for all those nice shiny car assembly plants with allegedly no stock, there are a hundred fields stocked full of new unsold cars.