Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:51 pm Post subject: Six Sigma
This has been another fascinating reading topic for me. I know that some of the methodolgies were borrowed from Deming's "Plan-Do-Check-Act" cycle (or PDSA as referred to here). I also realize that we are not typically dealing with an organization the size of Motorola or Honeywell, but do you think that the Six Sigma process be adapted to our field?
Define; Measure; Analyze; Improve; Control.
There are loads of books and articles out there that are both for and against this type of system. I would be interested to know your collective thoughts on the subject.
For those of you not familiar:
"Six Sigma at many organizations simply means a measure of quality that strives for near perfection. Six Sigma is a disciplined, data-driven approach and methodology for eliminating defects (driving towards six standard deviations between the mean and the nearest specification limit) in any process -- from manufacturing to transactional and from product to service.
The statistical representation of Six Sigma describes quantitatively how a process is performing. To achieve Six Sigma, a process must not produce more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities"
In our case, would "defects" be unsatisfied customers? Misdiagnosed vehicles? That's one tough goal! - How close can we come?
Joined: 15 May 2007 Posts: 774 Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: Re: Six Sigma
Hi Tom,
tomdruz wrote:
In our case, would "defects" be unsatisfied customers? Misdiagnosed vehicles? That's one tough goal! - How close can we come?
I think these might be good starting points, but feel we need to go upstream. For instance, a part improperly installed, caught in the shop and corrected constitutes a defect. This because there is a cost associated with it and it is non-value added for the client. Parts ordered wrong, errors in work-orders, even additional time spent because of improper tooling or less than best methods and on and on.
This also brings about an interesting point. Without implementation of the 14 points it may be difficult to get meaningful data. For instance, such figures will not be available in an organization rife with fear [point 8]. Nor will the figures be useful without understanding statistical theory [points 10, 11 and 12]. It is also not cost effective for a company focused on the short-term [point 1].
Instead those that collect such data must know it will not be used in a punitive manner are it will be false data. I think ideally such data should be collected, kept and plotted by technicians and used [by them] to judge their improvement. I look forward to hearing your further thoughts.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
