• 
  • Articles
  • Downloads
  • Links
  • Videos

Cutting Through The Six Sigma Hype

by Gary Cone, President and CEO of Global Productivity Solutions

There's a lot of hype surrounding Six Sigma these days and I will tell you we risk losing our grip on what it is all about. I would like to spend some time reminding you what Six Sigma is and what it is not.

What Six Sigma is:

1. A Philosophy. The philosophy can be boiled down to the GPS slogan - "better tomorrow than today." My interpretation of this slogan is that we can define the critical processes of our business, we understand the few critical measures of those processes, and we are always commissioning "adhoc" teams to pursue the next improvement opportunity - always. Six Sigma has the potential to be a vision tool or to paraphrase Tom Peters, a tool to get the herd generally headed west.
2. A Benchmarking Metric. To calculate this metric is the only purpose for defining and counting opportunities in a consistent manner. We convert defect data to DPMO or sigma measures strictly for the ability to benchmark. This is why it is important to know your control capability (note this is quite different from saying put control charts on everything) and know that it is within a reasonable range. We benchmark to know who to learn from and where to go apply resources. The sigma metric is only a management tool.
3. A Roadmap For Improvement. This is taught as "Black Belt" (Mikel Harry trademark?) training. It doesn't matter if we call it MAIC, DMAIC, GETS (Gather, Evaluate, Transform, and Sustain or GE Transportation Systems as you prefer), or PCOR (Prioritize, Characterize, Optimize, and Realize from our friends at Air Academy). Anybody who gets hung up on the words is just as guilty as the Shainin devotees - letting labels get in the way of progress. What's important is that we have a common toolset that is attuned to our changing needs as we learn about and improve our critical processes. If the toolset does not have enough tools to achieve benchmark results, learn which ones are missing and add to the toolset. Tools - useable and used best describes this approach. This means do not close your mind to new tools, just have a rigorous criteria for acceptance of the new tools. The person who suggests new tools must demonstrate the usefulness (application) and the benefit (results) to the organization. The Six Sigma toolset should be understood by any professional tasked with running a process, not just the people we are isolated from the process called "Black Belts."

What Six Sigma is not:

1. It is not a substitute for a good Quality System. Six Sigma maps sub processes; the Quality System should demand an accurate map of every critical process. Six Sigma evaluates the Measurement System of sub processes whereas the QUALITY SYSTEM should demand that every Measurement System is qualified prior to use (this includes accurate instructions and training for everyone involved). Six Sigma will put training, procedures, metrics, and so on in place where they are found to be lacking. The Quality System should have this disciplined practice already in place. In short, much of what is called Six Sigma these days is just sticking fingers in the leaky dike of a poor Quality System. "Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service" - Deming's point number 5. This should be the mission and the structure of the Quality System. Six Sigma is meant to augment it, not be a substitute for it.
2. It is not to be used to the exclusion of other known improvement tools. Lean Enterprise principles should be the first toolset that comes to mind. Should we map the value stream and remove obvious waste before starting Six Sigma? Should we embrace the ideas of SMED at the same time we are targeting processes? Is there less opportunity for defects in small inventories or large inventories? I hope the answers are obvious.
3. It is not a substitute for training your people in basic job skills. If you go into a project and find people doing the same job differently, figure out why the job is not clearly defined and why the people are not properly trained. Your biggest gain will be right there. If you find people constantly tweaking a process, talk them into not adjusting the process and it will usually settle right down. Then, go find out why the people were not properly trained.
4. It is not a substitute for having a disciplined product development process and rigorous management reviews. People are paying big bucks for DFSS these days where the existing process is haphazard, lacking simple metrics, absent of consequence for not achieving launch targets. Why? Go define the process you are really going to follow. Think about DFSS a year or so later.

Back to top of page...