Again, I don't want to be the defender of all things 6-S, but I have at least gone through the BB training (from two former GE Master BB who moved on to presumably greener pastures, consulting & training)
Bill,
I haven't read Jack's books, but I've have read & seen interviews with him. He has a very clear "perform or die" focus. As I understand it he laid out a metric of being #1 or #2 in a market or the entire division was gone. Great motivational tool until everyone gets burned out and says, "see ya, bub bye". I think your points are more a indictment of Jack Welch than 6-S. Had GE not had 6-S I think Jack would have behaved the same way...just used a different hammer. In my company (not a 6-S company & has no intention currently to be one) we recently introduced "Topgrading". Google "Topgrading" and you'll see similarities between what Jack twisted 6-S into & the goal of Topgrading.
Jennifer,
Good post.
re: 1) You're right, most businesses are small. I'm not so sure most of their processes are completely out of control, but I would wonder how many of them actually know where their processes are or understand, in a statistical sense, what their processes are about. While 6-S is a nice term, 6-S itself doesn't mandate +/- 6S in all processes...it does mandate that you understand what your capability is or will be & that it's in your best interest to get it as high as possible, within economic limitations. In fact GE had an average of around +/- 3S...from what my trainer said. What 6-S is about, mostly, is very tight project management & using quantitative & statistical means to move projects forward. 6-S also makes a very clear point of taking a systems approach to fixing a process or developing a new one. Regardless of the product/process/service that is developed(or fixed), process capability will be a concern when the product hits the market. That being the case...why wouldn't one want to consider process & measurement capability early in the project? If your best estimates, early on, indicate your process capability will be terrible or uncontrollable, or far too expensive then why would one want to spend the time & resources completeing the development program only to produce a product/process that you can't make money on? This isn't "high flying" as much as it is "prudent".
re: 2) There isn't program/practice made that prevents people from being dumb. There's no part of 6-S that says..."ignore what everyone else is doing & stay focused on your little world..." 6-S, or any approach, is only as good as the people practicing it. 6-S plus a good practioner wouldn't allow these examples to occur as they'd be looking at the big picture as well as the project focus. "Where are the stories about how the past 6-S projects are continuing to perform pleasurably over time, especially organization-wide?" Ahhh! a 6-S approach! "In God we trust, everyone else bring data!" I don't have any successful stories...I had the training...I understand & use many of the tools (none of which are 6-S orginals). Every program (LEAN, TOC, Kaizen, TQM....) has a slide in the introductory presentation..."this is how ACME Mfg saved $400MM dollars in the first two years...." Every program will have "great results" claims...even if they are stated...should you believe them? What is the basis of the claims? What was measured? Believe nothing you read & only half of what you see.
re 3) Yep. Like anything else someone can turn a buck on...lots of hype as the marketeers swarm. Again, I don't think this reflects so much on the actual, functional work someone would do in a 6-S effort as much this reflects on the people thenselves. It's no secret that management doesn't "get" alot of things...including CQE's & what they desire, or TQM. or LEAN or..... Take any star quarterback (of unknown skill) and send him/her against another team & you have a lost ball game. One person can't do it...it takes a team. CEO's that come into a company and promptly run it into the ground are not rare...does it follow that are CEOs are useless? No, there are good ones & ones that really should take up another line of work.
"My take on this whole thing is that it is the basic quality tools repackaged. After TQM's black eye, Quality needed a makeover."
Yep, absolutely. TQM did OK where I work, but if it takes a new coat of paint to get the tools & philosophy of doing things right in practice...I don't know that it's such a bad thing, whatever works. In the music industry people stopped buying plastic albums, the industry sales were flat...along comes a 79 cent to produced CD that sells for 18 bucks & everyone re-buys all the music they've ever owned. Is the music bad? Or is someone trying to turn a buck?
"It needed more focus in application, a more standardized approach and modern (quick profits) appeal. 6-S delivers that."
With all due respect, you don't understand 6-S. "quick profits" and "Six Sigma" is an oxymoron. A formal 6-S program is a pricey effort. The training suggests it's primarily used on "significant to the bottom line" projects. 6-S is more about doing it right the first time so you don't need to do it over..and looking far enough down known & expected roads (process capability, measurement stability & capability, understanding the true variables in your process, optimization of the output using those variables, testing process robustness to raw material variation...........) such that profits will indeed come or stop the work & move on.
"...when good diet, hygiene and healthy habits would help the organization perform at its natural best." This is closer to the 6-S that I was trained in. I can only speak from my experience. "Natural best" doesn't mean "entropy rules".
Sam,
re: "Is there any evidence,actual evidence from a real company, that shows a return on investment.i.e., increased revenue, fewer returns, increased customer base?"
See above. There are claims from all programs..the question is whether you can believe any of them. If anyone disagrees that better process capability & process control might be connected to fewer returns then I'd wonder what their doing in "Quality". I think if people would understand the nuts & bolts of what 6-S is, and not judge it at arms length from the hype that reaches them, they wouldn't wait to accept it based only on success stories. Simple logic & understanding the tools would answer their questions about it. It's tight project management where you try not to make assumptions & favor gathering data (i.e. knowledge, understanding) about the process.
________
It seems there are many people that willing to nuke 6-S without having at least had the training...I never would have guessed there was such an anti- movement. I'm not suggesting 6-S is the only option that is useful or that all companies drop what their doing and start a formal implementation ($$$$). There are lots of approaches available. I'm giving a rather large presentation to our Executive Committee on Monday...I'm suggesting to them, with supporting data, that we do need a better & improved Quality program. I'm not suggesting a full fledge 6-S adoption. Actually what I am presenting is a program I assembled from the ground up & inside out using good process understanding & the appropriate statistics. Pick or design a system that works and go for it. If it needs adjustment down the road...start adjusting. Tom Peters: "More at bats, more hits".