When you pull the curtain on the great and powerful Oz, you’re left with a simple man using smoke and props to cultivate an atmosphere of power and supreme knowledge. I find the same similarities with six sigma.
I can still recall the heightened anticipation I felt, back in the fall of 2000 as I was getting ready to visit a plant that was utilizing six sigma. Being a devout quality professional for 18 years and committed to the cause, the very thought of being exposed to the six sigma methodology was as exciting as a trip to Cancun for spring break is for a college student.
The six sigma presentation was being conducted by a trained black belt, I was most definitely in the presence of greatness. This was the equivalent of a youth hockey player going to a lecture by Wayne Gretzky. As the presenter neared the end and the truth unfolded before me, I felt empty and disillusioned. The project being explained saved in the vicinity of $200,000 annually and should not be taken lightly, but it was how it was saved. To make a long story short a process wasn’t capable so the tolerance was opened up. The widening of the tolerance was verified to not compromise product integrity and allowed for the elimination of extensive sorting and rework, which is where the savings came from.
I stood there in disbelief and thought, “this is six sigma?” When I worked as a quality engineer, this was my job. This type of activity was done all the time. I’ve been utilizing a structured problem solving methodology my entire career complimented with the quality tools to solve problems and save money. Jack Welch didn’t put me on the fast track. I did not see articles about what I or my peers were doing showing up in every quality trade magazine, the Wall Street Journal, Business Week and the New York Times.
I immediately thought, there’s got to be more to this that I’m not seeing. I continued to read as much as I could on the subject. About a year later I was asked to attend six sigma green belt training. Not the pinnacle of six sigma training, but I was on the cusp. Green Belt is not a Master Black Belt or a Black Belt, but I was getting in the door to finally see the great and powerful Oz. It was at the completion of the training, my initial thoughts on six sigma were solidified. I leaned nothing new, the techniques being taught are the same ones that I have used for years. The methodology is basically the same. It’s been repackaged, called something different and gained a whole lot of notoriety. But when you take off the bow and rip the fancy wrap away, it’s still structured problem solving utilizing a variety of quality tools that have been around for a long time.
I was performing design of experiments both classical and Taguchi methods when my instructors were figuring out who they were going to prom with. I got in a heated discussion with the statistics instructor regarding Taguchi methods for experimental design. If you ever want to tick off a true statistician, bring up Taguchi methods. They don’t like that the Taguchi approach because it does not include all the runs a classical design would. I’ve used it many times with great success and saved a great deal of time over clasiscal approaches to experimental designs.
I recall my early years of quality engineering being devoted to problem solving and process improvement. The process utilized included the following steps:
- Define the problem
- Observe the process
- Develop potential causes or solutions
- Select a cause or solution
- Verify selected cause or solution
- Implement solution
- Review and revise
Define the problem
This step is paramount and often times requires collecting data to arrive at a good problem statement. It makes sense that you have to measure the process in order to understand what its current performance is and what levels of improvement are realistic. Are you seeing any similarities yet?
Observe the process
This is critical to understanding how the process works and how it functions. Not how it should work or how it was meant to work, but how it actually works. Some of the applicable tools are process flow, value stream mapping, run charts, histograms and paraeto charts.
Develop potential causes or solutions
Utilize fault tree analysis, brainstorming, cause and effect diagrams to develop a list of potential causes of the problem or potential solutions.
Select a cause or solution
From the list of potential causes or solutions you must now pick one. This process can be as simplistic as multi-voting or as complex as a design of experiment. The goal is to whittle down the list to a key contributor.
Verify the selected cause or solution
In the old days, prior to six sigma we would verify the potential solution prior to a full scale implementation. We would run a test or sample run to prove out the selection prior to spending more resources on the implementation.
Implement the solution
After the potential solution is proven effective through testing and preliminary evaluation, you implement it.
Review and revise
This is where you monitor the process to ensure you receive the results you were looking for and implement actions to sustain them over time.
If you look at the above problem solving steps, you’ll find they are very similar to those of the six sigma DMAIC model. Six Sigma is not innovative, it is repackaging of what has existed for many years. The tools are the same, flowcharting, interrelationship diagrams, design of experiments, QFD, ANOVA, blah, blah, blah.
Now we have lean six sigma. Six sigma wasn’t enough so it’s been energized and put on steroids with lean. I recall when a couple of lean six sigma consultants came through our facility and asked me “are you guys doing lean?” I thought, that is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Forgive me, but I was trained on lean when it was called TPS or the Toyota Production System. Lean is not something you do. Testing and inspecting is something you do, lean is a philosophy or culture that grips an organization and flows from the top. It drives a mentality of continually improving and eliminating waste within an organization.
These guys continued through the facility and pointed out areas where we can save money and become leaner. Wow, there you have it, the great and powerful Oz has spoken. There are opportunities for improvement in our facility? I did not know that. Good job Sherlock, that’s the first rule of lean, there is ALWAYS room to improve. It reminds me when
Toyota’s top executive visited a
Toyota plant in
Canada and asked the management team what their problems were. The team was proud and quick to display charts and graphs depicting how well the plant had been doing and reflected the operational excellence of the plant. They also communicated to the Toyota executive that they didn’t really have any big problems they were working on, as they have been solved. The
Toyota executive looked at the charts, looked at the management team and said “no problems, no good. If you have no problems, I don’t need management”. This exemplifies the foundation of lean, it’s a culture and philosophy, not an activity.
The philosophy and culture of lean drive activities associated with continual improvement. Within the structure of a lean company, everybody is a problem solver. All employees are trained in the concepts, you don’t rely on the chosen few who are the master black belts or black belts.
