Let's fix Six Sigma!

[prototyper]

Bev,

I couldn't agree more!!!

That is why I love the cove and the opportunity for quality professionals to discuss tools and techniques to both learn and impart the benefit of our personal experience.

Let's all work together to promote quality awareness and develop our systems and processes without the diversions and expense of the latest fads!

 

[amanbhai]

Adding to Wes' comments - I would agree there is no re-invention of the wheel. The same old tools are used in SS.

The wheel is still the same but how it is put on the car has changed. One of the beauties of SS is the discipline of a defined and planned project. It is one thing to have all the tools but another to know how and when to use them. SS is not so much about the tools as about what you do with them. The planning, coordination of team members, documentation and analysis of data and systematic drive to the next level of the project is, for me, the advantage of SS.

When I think of "fixing six sigma" I think not of the program itself but of the misuse of the program. I would venture to say, as with any discipline, Six Sigma has been beaten up so badly in some cases it wouldn't be recognizable.

As Wes pointed out management is spurred by the bottom line of economics however when SS is misused they see only the cost and a drag on their profits.

Yes, Six Sigma needs fixing. My observation is it isn't the system that is broken.

Dave

Really good to read you thing but what specifics to fix ? can someone identify?

 

[prototyper]

That's not to say that I'm opposed to change when something better comes along, I just don't like the rebranding of existing methodologies as flavour of the month!

 

[Jen Kirley]

Thanks Wes. We do use FMEA but not as a root cause problem solving tool. (it's the latest fad that consultants are pushing instead of teh fishbone diagram) We DO use it in new product and process development and for implementing corrective actions to complex problems. It is useful for what it was intended. However, we are also working on a new approach to 'mapping' the functions of a system and looking at how it can fail to improve the design. There is less emphasis on the probability of occurence or detection and more emphasis on the severity of the effect: if it can happen and it's bad - fix it! We're looking very hard at the technique known as FAST pioneered by George Bytheway.

I would like to be a student in your methods.

 

[justncredible]

The tools have been around for years, the system has not. It is not rebranding. Just as the Toyota system consist of a group of tools, the six sigma system is a group of tools.

The tools and six sigma work, and they work very well. As with any tool it may not be the right set for a job. That is not the failure of six sigma system it is the failure of the people that misunderstand how to use the tools.

There is no fix, since SS is not broke.

TQM is not broke, my plant manager walks thru all the offices at least twice a day. He is involved, as is all the management here.

Any of the so-called quality flavors of the day are building blocks that each helps with true progress in the manufacturing world. Learn them apply them and tweak them to meet the needs of each company. In that they are robust, they are adaptable. Bev has provided a wonderful example of how she has applied toolsets to meet the needs of her company. She is a shining example of a robust quality engineer. She has taken the box opened it and expanded outside of it, not being held back. Others should follow her example and embrace the toolsets and expand them to fit the needs. I think Bev is by far the most wise guru I have seen here. Miner is a close secound.

 

[Tom Slack]

I think that jumping on the bandwagon of the latest fad is a shortcoming of senior management as it is usually just the same tools and strategies rebranded and hyped.
I have been in quality for 25 years and am yet to see something radically different.

We were at a craft show and my wife took a shine to a future dust collector. I thought "I could make that." The vendor had a sign: "You could make this, you should make this, but are you REALLY going to make this." I bought his craft, even though I had the tools and most of the materials.

Management is the same way, they don't care about how old the tools are, they want implementation. Management will gladly pay a lot of money for change that is effective. I think sometimes Six Sigma consultants are effective because management paid them a great deal of money, then feel obligated to implement their advice.

This summer I was doing consulting for several different clients. Often I told them things they already knew. The difference is I was persistent in making the clients change their business practices.

IMHO implementation lags new tool development.

Tom

 

[Bev D]

there is a lot of truth in what you say. Too often senior management will listen to outsiders before they will listen to insiders. The danger in this- besides paying more for outside advice that you get from the inside and the inherent morale problems with 'those who could have done it but wern't listended to' - is if the outside prophet is a quack you really mess up your company...

A good consultant will mitigate these risks.

Those who are on the inside and would rail against the consultant that is only saying the same thing they've said for years must take a good hard look at themselves and ask if the reason they weren't being listened to comes from senior managment or from themselves...this is a hard question to answer honestly. Harder still is what do you do with the answer? Been there; done that; burned the T shirts!

 

[Tom Slack]

Those who are on the inside and would rail against the consultant that is only saying the same thing they've said for years....

Bev,
It is not you. It is the 300 pound gorilla in the room. You know the rest, only an outside consultant is allowed to mention the beast. Goes back to Demming driving fear (of mentioning the gorilla) out of the organization, much less getting "permission" to do something about it.

Not all companies I have worked for are this way. I can think of one that was, but the only thing left of them is a logo and a lonely repairman.

We can add this to the list.

Thanks again,

Tom

 

[weaverman - 2010]

So what is this FAST thing?

Bev - thanks for that post about how you "fixed" 6S where you are. You could expand that and write it up as an article for your quality mag of choice (although, as we all know, the Cove is the place to be!)

And not to derail this thread, but...

We're looking very hard at the technique known as FAST pioneered by George Bytheway.

I thought that sounded interesting, but came up with nothing in Google. Well, almost nothing... In case anyone else is interested, FAST stands for Function Analysis System Technique, and the man is actually Charles Bytheway (I wanted to add a link but don't have enough posts here to do so... yet!)

 

[Bev D]

thanks for clarifying his first name! I just remembered his last name because it's pronounced exactly the way it's spelled: by the way....

there are very few articels on the web as most are pretty old. soem material can be found at www.jrosspub.com

if you google "Charles Bytheway FAST" you'll find most of what's out there.

he also has recently published a book (a wierd slog of a read tho - you really have to work at gettign good info out of it)


added to FAST is a concept called eFAST developed by a firm called "the new science of fixing things" whcih adds energy transfer to the concept. A really neat way to take some older concepts and use them in new ways...