Re: Japanese companies don’t adopt SIX SIGMA / ISO - Still they are leading in Qualit
You know, there are some topics on this Forum that inflame passions, and this is one of them. SS is not bad or good, ISO is not bad or good, etc. They are methods, systems, that package basically the same quality tools.
You have to consider that sometimes passion is not just kneejerking, and not a solely emotional response. My own concern is that SS is a significant step
backwards in the quest for quality improvement, and I get a little tired of the act of pointing out the emperor's nakedness being characterized as "bashing." Consider the foundations of SS:
- It's built on principles that are either demonstrably false (the 1.5 shift) or unnecessarily complex (DPMO, DMAIC).
- Nearly all of its proponents make unverifiable or demonstrably false claims of success
- The expense of training and maintenance don't have demonstrable ROI in most cases, especially when compared to traditional methods
I could go on, but suffice it to say that what I feel passionate about is the fact that as SS gains ascendancy, we seem to be seeing product quality and
profitability--especially in the U.S.-- moving in the opposite direction. People need to have a basic understanding of variation, probability, and logic in process design. Given those basic skills, we need
leadership that understands that enduring product quality is not the result of slogans, colorful belts, and finagled mathematics and that short-term fiscal performance is not a reliable yardstick.