The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line

The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove ForumsThe Elsmar Cove Forums
  Statistical Techniques and 6 Sigma
  6sigma only for giants

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   6sigma only for giants
posted 09 July 2001 04:36 AM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
About this six sigma matter, as I
-> recall, Deming did not have a very positive attitude in his last book.Why?
-> Does it work? Works only for giants like Motorola?

IP: Logged

Forum Contributor

Posts: 275
Registered: Sep 1999

posted 09 July 2001 08:58 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Sam   Click Here to Email Sam     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Juran is not positive about the six sigma process either.
My question is, why stop with six sigma? Why not go on with 9, 12, 15,18 . . . ?
We could go on forever, the tails of the curve will never go to "0".

IP: Logged

Michael T
Forum Contributor

Posts: 43
From:Cleveland, Ohio
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 09 July 2001 09:52 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Michael T   Click Here to Email Michael T     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Sotiris,

As I understand Dr. Deming's less than supportive comments concerning Six Sigma (this is just my interpretation/opinion), it all stems from the philosophy of conforming to specifications. Conformance to specifications does not take into consideration the loss associated with variation. While a process can be within specification, the variation around X-bar may be widely dispersed. Even with special causes of variation eliminated (the process is considered "in control"), the goal should be to reduce the common causes of variation to obtain a tight grouping around x-bar, not maintain conformance to specifications. By adding a Taguchi Loss Function, it is possible to observe that, the further a process moves from optimal, the greater the loss to the customer. That should be the goal - reducing the loss to the customer, not conformance to a specification. As Dr. Deming states, "The most important use of a loss function is to help us to change from a world of specifications (meet specifications) to continual reduction of variation about the target through improvement of processes." (The New Economics, Chapter 10).

Now, my thoughts on Six Sigma (taking Dr. Deming's System of Profound Knowledge and the philosophy of continuous improvement into consideration) are that Six Sigma focus's too much on the short term benefits derived from a Six Sigma project (and the financial gains derived from it). It lacks the long term focus necessary to fundamentally change the company culture to one of, say, Kaizen. Six Sigma seems to be looking for those big gains, overlooking the small incremental changes to a process that can reduce common causes of variation and tighten the process to get ever closer to the target value. Another problem I see with Six Sigma is that the focus is on large dollar projects. For example, at the onset of a Six Sigma program, projects will only be accepted if the expected payback exceeds a certain dollar figure, say $750,000. Eventually, those projects will be come more scarce as the number of "big ticket" projects diminishes. Then what? Lower the expected payback value? Ok... sure - drop the payback to $500,000. Eventually, those projects will also dry up. If the target payback keeps getting smaller, eventually the cost of a implementing a project will exceed it's payback. Yet, in all this hoopla about Six Sigma, where are those small changes to a process that the person on the shop floor can tell you about that can make a process a little better, get the product manufactured a little easier or a little quicker. There aren't any huge $$ gains, just the small incremental increases that lead to enhanced productivity, reduced variation and more contented line workers who feel that management is listening to them and they have control over their process.

Now - I am not saying Six Sigma is a bad thing. It is a step in the right direction. Training people in process improvement, SPC, DOE, etc., cannot be a bad thing. Like ISO or QS, it is a good start towards a process of continuous improvement, and that (continuous improvement) should be the ultimate goal of management.

So... does Six Sigma work. The short answer is, yes, Six Sigma works. Does it only work for giants? Don't know... Motorola is huge and has gained a great deal of notoriety because of Six Sigma. I don't know of any small companies that have implemented Six Sigma because you just don't hear of them.

Anyway - these are my thoughts on the subject. I'm donning my asbestos underware for the flames I may catch for this post...



IP: Logged

Al Dyer
Forum Wizard

Posts: 814
From:Lapeer, MI USA
Registered: Oct 2000

posted 09 July 2001 09:52 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Al Dyer   Click Here to Email Al Dyer     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote

I like your style of thinking. Maybe after 6 sigma we can have 8 sigma, including all the new books, training, and associated costs.

Where will the madness end?


IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Marc Smith | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Please Visit the new Elsmar Cove Forums! All these threads are there and much more!

Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!