Eric,

Lean or Six Sigma?  Six Sigma or Lean?  I have seen this endless debate about which should be used first or which should replace the other.  In my opinion, you need both working in unison.  I've been involved with past implementations of Six Sigma that strove to develop Belts specialized in the respective disciplines.  I believe it resulted in sub-optimal project results and resulted in mass confusion and turf wars between the disciplines.  SS BBs would go overboard looking to use statisitical sledgehemmers when there was a practical solution out there with minimal effort and/or a simpler analysis-albeit this was being driven by the requirements for certification, but that's another discussion.  Lean Belts would work a project and leave it sub-optimally improved and do little to attack variability.  I don't know if it was intentionally communicated, but there was this feeling that Lean was more "simple" and that it was primarily for the grunt on the line while Six Sigma was more for the professional engineering ranks.  The two methodologies did seem at opposite ends of the normal curve.  Yes, ideally MBBs were to have oversight for the conduct of the project and look at the optimal time to match SS BB assets with Lean assets.  Reality never quite worked that way.  Each community closed on its self and would not support the other or they committed themselves so much that they did not have the bandwidth to support the other.  Belts need to be trained in both arms to solve process issues.  It extends the training pipeline for a SS BB by about 1-2 weeks to incorporate Lean, but the ROI for that minimal amount of time is significant.  If it doesn't happen, and you're indoctrinated in a certain discipline, that's the only thought process that you can use to solve a problem.  I came up as a SS BB and MBB, and of course initially thought that I had the panacea for all of the process ills of the world,  it wasn't long before I matured my vision and incorporated Lean into my tool box.  I look at is a responsibility that I have to those that I mentor and to the Process Owners that I impact with my projects.  I always communicate to the GBs and BBs that I mentor to use a Practical, Graphical, and Analytical (PGA) approach to the DMAIC thought process.  Embodied within that progression of tool application is the applicability of Lean tools. 

Sometimes the issues will be very prevalent and easy to see and one or the other methodologies is obviously the choice.  Other times it requires a thorough baseline assessment of the key processes that are driving the process.  Lean is good at this process and dropping the waterline so that the true landscape of projects is obvious to all.  It all comes back to the ubiquitous phrase, 'it depends...' 

If you've been implementing Lean that's great.  But that's only going to allow you to harvest a fraction of the fruit that's higher up the sigma tree.  Six Sigma will take you to the next level and then DFSS will close the final gap.  If you've leaned your processes, understand the key processes that drive your business, attached balanced scorecards, have management support, and a clear communication plan, it sounds like you're ready to take off.  Hope this has helped. 

Regards,

Erik     

The debate is purely pedantic.  Lean has a tool set that is geared to improve process flow.  Six Sigma was designedto specifically focus on process variation.

As someone who has been certified in both disciplines I prefer to think of Lean Sigma ans a complete toolkit. I use the tool interchangably as I approach a process. Instead of a process map I use a Value Stream Map it tells me more.

Once you lean out a process you won't have to wait long until you find the sources of variaition.

Don't separate them combine them. The only people that are not combining these two important tool sets are consultants - both internal and external as a territorial battle.

Eric,

For some reason people have got it locked into there heads they can only do one initiative at a time, they like to use the term "my plate is full" which when it comes to interpreting it does not mean anything. Something is full but it isn't a plate. If they can only do one thing then you need to roll some people over because there are several people out there who can actually focus on more than one thing at a time.

The two are complimentary and synergistic. Anyone who belives that Lean fixes everything has never run into a real complex problem and anyone who has done a poorly selected SS project and not had to deal with workplace organization and standardized work just didn't realize they were doing it. The two were launched together at Motorola in 88 and Allied in 95. GE did DFT before it did SS and it helped tremendously.

There are books available on the integration. Several groups would like you to believe it is their idea and it is new and they invented it. It isn't new. It has been done for at least 12 years.

Watch the movie "Tin Cup." There is a scene where Kevin Costner breaks all his clubs except a 7 iron. His caddy (Cheech) walks off and Costner wins the tournament with just a 7 iron. When he brags about it to Don Johnson rather than be impressed he just asks him "Why." Best analogy I have ever seen to trying to fix something when a person is so stricken with "Intellectual Bigotry" that they refuse to be intelligent in their deployment. You are allowed to use more than one club (tool) and since it isn't tournament play there isn't a limit on the number of clubs you can carry in your bag - you can actually bring a couple bags. At the end of the day the CEO is not going to ask to see what tool you used to fix the problem. They only care about whether it got fixed.

Nobody working for Womack is going to call you up and place you on a pedistal for being a pure Lean guy. Nobody at ASQ will reward you for being a pure SS guy. Your customer is the company you work for. You owe them the most effeicent and effective deployment they can get. That methodology has been through the integrated approach not through dedication to some set of tools.

Good luck.

Eric,

The advice you have been given is sound.  I'm a bit suspicious about the term "Lean Sigma".  It seems another slick way of the vast army of Snake-oil salesmen to seaprate you from from your wedge of cash.

I see no difference between Lean and 6-Sigma.  They share the same parents.  I see Lean as a powerful management philosophy with 6-Sigma as a good tool.  Unfortunately most people's appreciation of Lean extends only to the well-known bag of tools (there are some which are obscure).

Having studied Lean for sometime, I'm convinced you cannot implement Lean and sustain the gains unless management are willing to change both their attitudes and skills.  The organisation needs to move from a traditional bureaucracy to becoming a Learning Organisation which values its human capital.  If this is not happening Lean will fail in the long run.

The myth that Lean focuses on flow and 6-Sigma on variation is not quite correct.  Take a look at any Lean tool (kanban, error proofing, work balancing, 5S, etc.).  They all have one thing in common: differentiating the abnormal from the normal, and making it visible so it can be addressed immediately.  To me that is attacking variation.

There was a suggestion that Lean was for "grunts" and 6-Sigma for the "white collar".  That may be the case, but if it is so, I fear we will travel back in time to the days of Scientific Management separating the "thinkers" from the "doers".  The whole thrust of Lean is to break down that division, and that is usually not appreciated by those considering it implementation.  To implement any Lean tool, you must commit to learning from the experience and using the brains of those on the floor.  Most automotive manufacturers now have andon (or process-control boards) which were pioneered by Toyota.  At Toyota, the line worker has an obligation to call for help or even stop the line if there is a problem because Toyota sees each of these incidents as a learning opportunity.  This fact is one that has been hard to swallow by the other manufacturers (culture is tough to change), and so the line worker is asked to pull the chord only if the problem is considered to be serious.  We have 100-year traditions of not asking line workers for their opinions, and now we are asking them to make decisions about problem severity?

Toyota hates variation with a passion only matched by the best 6-Sigma organisations, probably.  They are also obsessive about standard work (defined and refined by the people who do the job, not consultants).  They are obsessive about continuous improvement and see this as the third apex of a virtuous triangle (the others being people and standards).  And this leads to my concern: how can we measure variation when our "white collars" see themselves as "knowledge workers" and do not have standard operations?  Most transactional or business Black Belts struggle.

As with Lean, 6-Sigma will not be self sustaining unless the organisation values its Green Belts and encourages them to improve continuously.  Black Belts alone won't hack it.

Hope this helps.

Huge difference between "lean Tools" and Six Sigma tools.

Lean = Improved process flow

Six Sigma = Reduced process variaiton

Lean Sigma means to merge these two separate disciplines into a single entity. Lean Sigma is the next logical step in the continuous improvment journey.

With due respect, I'm not sure how an organisation can improve flow without tackling variation.

From my research, Toyota seems to have a visceral understanding of variation.  They have DPMO's  for which others would sell their grannies. And through their coaching their suppliers are either not far behind or disappear.

My concern is that we have way too many snake-oil salesmen trying to sell industry the latest miracle cure.  But what is sad is the number of gullible managers who buy just about anything rather than think for themselves.  In about six months time either Business Week or HBR or the National Enquirer will publish an article titled "Beyond Lean Sigma".  It may signify significant advances in thinking or it may be another scam, but it will confuse and frustrate hard-working people and may cause another strategic detour: "Drop Lean/6-Sigma and start BrandX!"

Each of these tools/ideas/methodologies/philosophies only has value if it harnesses the intelligence of the whole organisation, not just the annointed few.  That is the essence of Lean, not kanban, error proofing, JIT, 5S, Visual Factory, ..........................................

Folks,

I work  at a Scientific software company and we are considering whether or not to undertake either Six Sigma, Lean, or some combination.  I am new to this area, but have experience in ISO 9002 certification.  Since SS programs were originally designed for manufacturing environments I was wondering if any of you could comment about applicability to a software company or point in a direction to conduct a solid evaluation.  Thanks for the help.

Mark

Take a look at the last link at the bottom of this page. It's for a conference on Six Sigma for software. I think it answers your question...it's applicable. I think attending may help you with your evaluation. Each company is different, so evaluations of others are of little value -- every company has different CTQs.

--Carol

Mark,

You have now bought into the two of the biggest crap sandwichs being sold today. Six Sigma at Motorola was "Six Sigma in everything we do" since 1988 and they do a fair amount of software.

The second sandwich is that you need to choose between SS and Lean. We deployed Lean (then called Cycle Time reduction - 50% per year) at the same time we did SS. Allied concurrent deployments. GE did DFT before we did the SS deployment.

We have seen the "we're different" thing for quite a while on this site. Read Demings "deadly diseases and obstacles."

Good luck.

Eric,

There was a nice article in March 2002 issue of Quality Progress comparing Lean, Six Sigma, and the Theory of Constraints.

Regards,

John J. Flaig, Ph.D.

Applied Technology (e-AT-USA.com)

Dear All

I am very interested in Lean Manufacturing Principle. But I have simple material to learn, I wonder anyone can help me to share some for reference?

With great thanks.

Dr. Flaig,

I can not gain access to the March 2002 Edition of Quality Progress.  Can you e-mail me a copy of the article comparing the 3 approaches?  I am writing a presentation on the synergy of them and this article would help.

Thanks,

Larry SSBB

Hi

Interested by your comment towards the end - that knowledge workers claim not to have "standard operations". If you take Drucker's definition of a knowledge worker (someone who has to define their work before they can do it), then I guess you have to concede that you can't specify in advance what output is going to be produced in any given context - the deciding has to be done first.

But all that aside, knowledge workers most decidedly do have "standard operations" - they're found at the level of physical actions, not outcomes. The "standard operations" of a knowledge worker are things like "pick up phone", "reply to email", "schedule meeting", "draft agenda".

I coach knowledge workers in improving their productivity. One of the key things we get across is to distinguish between the outcome (which is often a sequence of "next actions" which cannot reliably be predicted more than one or two steps ahead) and the very next action. Both have to be decided as soon as possible after anything that could be new work shows up. Deciding on the next physical action has the effect of "intelligently dumbing down" the work and tends to cut through procrastination. We also teach people to "do it now" if the next action is something that can be done in under 2 minutes (assuming they're ever going to do it at all).

The combined effect of this is usually that organisational as well as personal throughput get faster and smoother. A bit like white-collar "lean" manufacturing (to stretch a metaphor).

You seem to see a link between the lack of standard operations for white-collar workers and a difficulty in measuring variation (though I'm not sure which variations you have in mind here). I'm interested in how that might relate to what we see happening in our coaching process. Can you explain more about what you believe that link is - ie how does a lack of standard operations for white collar workers prevent the measurement of variation?

J

I have that article of Lean vs Sigma vs TOC. It is very resourceful. I've been trained in Six Sigma & Lean tools. But it is more than just that. It comes down to using Both Lean & Six Sigma. Lean is very visual in mapping out the value stream, setting things in order with 5S, and taking control of your materials. Start off in Lean & let Six Sigma follow. The organization needs to think long-term results, as short-term you're cleaning out the 'garbage'.

Six Sigma really helps develop any understanding of process complexity and an importance of 'preventive' in not allowing defects to occur. DMAIC is the backbone of Six Sigma.

I've benefited from both and they can be used throughout the organization. You need discipline, commitment, and teamwork. Realize your employees are your greatest asset.

Hope this helps,

Steven

Hello Steven,

Could you please email me the article that you have talked about? Thanks very much.

Usha

What is your email address, so I can send it to you.

Steven K.

my email address is usha.ramanathangmail.com. Thanks very much.

Steven,

I am also interested in this article, if you don't mind:

OLIVIERdotANDRE3atPOSTdotBE

thanks

my mail id is rajesh.poddaripcl.co.in.

if u could mail the article to me too.

thanks

Steven,

May I also have the article plus anything else you have on Lean, Six Sigma, TQM, TOC, and soft skills?

Please send today.

The referenced article comparing Six Sigma, Lean and TOC  was written by my good friend and colleague, Mr. Dave Nave, a graduate of the Deming Scholars' MBA Program at Fordham.  Womack received permission from the ASQ to post it on his LEI website and it can be found at the following link:

http://www.lean.org/Community/Registered/ArticleDocuments/ASQ%20story%20on%20quality,%20sigma%20and%20lean.pdf

Best to all,

Charles H.

Sorry, the link I posted in the previous message didn't work when pasted into the search engine.  To find the article, go to the LEI website, log in, click on "Library" and then run a search for "Nave" and it should come up in the website search results

Best of luck,

Charles H.

I've sent an email to the isixsigma (forum-downloads).  Hopefully they will post it soon.  If not soon, then I would need an email address to send it to.

Also, here is a great link to http://www.asq.org on a pdf about Lean & SixSigma.

http://www.asq.org/pub/qualityprogress/past/0403/qp0403smith.pdf

ASQ owns exclusive copyrights to the article I wrote. The full title and master location are:

"How to Compare Six Sigma, Lean and the Theory of Constraints: A Framework for choosing what's best for your organization" ...Dave Nave, Quality Progress, March 2002, Volume 35 Number 3, American Society for Quality

http://www.asq.org/pub/qualityprogress/past/0302/ qp0302nave.pdf

I am glad this article is of interest.

Dave

Thanks, Dave.  I knew the ASQ owns it, but Womack somehow got them to agree to let him put it on his website as a pdf download.  As always, it is for personal use only.

Take care,

Charles H.

I do not understand why TOC is separated as a standalone subject. 

Any IE either trained in the western countries or Japan shall know how to identify bottleneck or some geniues like Goldrat called it a constraint. TOC is just a subset in IE or lean and it does not qualify to be put side by side with six sigma and lean.

When we did not have enough Lean-Sigma folks trained to do the "Lean Fits Everywhere - Do Lean Everywhere" approach some consultants wanted us to take, we used Theory of Constraints to help us focus and prioritize those Lean efforts to get more capacity out of the constraint.  One time the constraint was actually the fact that it took too long to do a particular process. We held a rapid improvement event to improve the process by only doing what provided value.  When an organization matures to the point that they can let loose of the emotional ties to particular methods and just do the right thing to improve the bottom line it is possible to get 25-40% step jumps in performance.  Some things done to re-evaluate the current business rules that have developed over time can also assist in maintaining the higher level of flow. Such methods as going from monthly to daily reporting, using buffers to ensure the constraint is never starved for work, and making sure that the sales folks are coming up to speed with new offers to improve plant throughput when the hidden capacity is unveiled. 

 

A seasoned Certified Quality Manager does not place emphasis on the category of changes being pursued for the sake of whether it is Lean or Six-sigma, but logically moves his team forward using a systems approach to remove waste, improve flow, and increase throughput against conditions of variation and uncertainty.  When the constraint is in the market, few beneficial improvements can trigger a step jump to help the bottom line, but a company having developed a 'Solution For Sales' is poised to advance in market share.  When faster flow is combined with better reliability in schedule and scope, new opportunities to please the customer rise, ensuring that both the company and the workers prosper as a result of the process changes.  So it is the holistic approach of system process improvement that brings the fastest return on investment and improved camaraderie among the employees of all departments. Solve a core conflict or root problem and the people will love you; push a new methodology because corporate says to do so and you will be despised.  May those of you who understand how to solve real problems achieve multiple successes as you seek to make a better world. 

In a word:

"Lean is Art.

Six sigma is Science"

Simon

That's more than a word and it's BS.

Lean is the foundation and the stability.

Does it surprise you that companies like Toyota achieve better results than the Six Sigma companies?

The consultants are wrong and TOC is just what you described - a prioritization tool.

I agree, absolutely. Sig sigma need lean touch. It need a little love there.

This is a very Interesting thread.  I am a practicing TOC Consultant and for that I will apologies up front.  Please don’t hold it against me too much.  If it helps, I offer that I am also a graduate of the fine IE program at the University of Michigan.

 

What prompted me to comment on this thread is the following question; “I do not understand why TOC is separated as a standalone subject” posed by “Dog Sxxt.”  On the surface, this question is nothing but a genuine appeal for clarity, an attempt to understand better.  On the other hand, it also reminded me of my initial reaction when I was introduced to Lean Manufacturing at Boeing.  For the longest while, I had a difficult time identifying myself as a Lean Practitioner. 

 

I had never heard the term Lean at UofM and it seemed like so much less than the breadth and depth of what the Industrial Engineering Profession had to offer a company.  It didn’t help that most of what I was learning came across as an academically inferior version of what I had been exposed to at UofM.  It was beyond me why companies where jumping on this Lean bandwagon while dismissing IE practices as the root cause for inefficiencies.

 

When the Six Sigma program was later introduced to Boeing I had my hands full with TOC so I didn’t pursue the Six Sigma certification opportunities.  However, I bought the books to satisfy myself that not much had changed since college.  To my surprise, going through the material for a second time and after some real world experience I was better able to comprehend and internalize the material.

 

I first discovered TOC at the same time I received my lean training.  For some reason, I found TOC more appealing at the time and thought it was a good compliment to the material I had learned in IE.  However, when I tried to get my professors back at UofM interested, I discovered a very strong anti-TOC / anti-Goldratt sentiment through-out the department.  The Japan Institute established by funding from the Big Three auto manufacturers had become the single biggest private-sector initiative in the department. 

 

The interesting thing is that one of the main reasons given at the time for why TOC couldn’t find a place at such a prestigious institution was that TOC wasn’t academically rigorous enough.  It tended to oversimplify the challenges of managing a company (as opposed to Lean – which had clearly shown that real improvements can only come after a long and difficult journey – my words, not theirs.)  Most of the professors by this time had jumped en mass onto the Lean bandwagon.  Curriculums were updated to include Lean language in practically every basic IE course.  Less than five years had elapsed since I had graduated.  Needless to say, I was more than just a little confused at the time.  Recently, it has become more acceptable to claim TOC as a subset of Lean.  Ironic, isn’t it?

 

Years and many implementations later, I am thankful for the different perspectives that exist today.  Had I known I was preparing for the awesome responsibility of helping to save companies from bankruptcy or surviving the pressures of global competition, I might have paid more attention to each learning opportunity. 

 

So, to the comment “I do not understand why TOC is separated as a standalone subject. “  I respectfully submit that you are on the right track.  If I may quote Covey, “seek first to understand…”  In the end, you may decide that you wasted your time, but on the other hand, you too may discover something beneficial to you or your customers.

 

Bert

I know the thread from Simon "LEAN is Art" and "Six Sigma is Science" is Nov05...its just I couldnt help myself to add to it even it is almost a year on - it brought such a feeling of WOW! somebody actually managed to hit the nail on the head.  CONGRATS! if there was a price I would give it to you Sir Simon! Allow me to embroil further just a little! "LEAN is Science in Art Form" - probably the reason why so many companies fail to copy it.  It CAN'T be copied!  Its an art form.  You have to become an ARTIST, not just you, everybody in the company, not just any artist, but an ARTIST, like Rembrandt.  Toyota is a painting like "Die Nagwag" from Rembrandt, and it gets worse folks! its evolving, it gets better and better (almost like us humans species, if you are a sucker enough to believe that amantra which is called evolution, but thats a completely different thread and day) all the time (have you seen the Lexus? just the only of its kind in the world, and its selling).  Toyota is light years ahead of the pack (thats you and me so by the way)...number 8 in the world...only second to the oil giants, the retail giant, General Motors (which is struggling so by the way - we're all waiting in anticipation to see wheter Carlos "The Great" will come to its rescue), Chevron and DaimlerChrysler.  Have any of you folks actually ever visited Toyota Japan website?  There's some info on the TPS and some VIDEOS of the plant in ACTION.  Go watch it! You might understand Sir Simon's revelation re LEAN...It is art.  Six Sigma on the other hand is STATS on STEROIDS...if you folks don't mind me saying so...which I guess is science or business science or whatever.  The importent thing is, it can be COPIED.  It was designed to copy...still require intelligence.  For you folks who still can't make head nor tail between LEAN, Six Sigma and TOC, I recommend "The NEW LEAN Toolbox" by John Bicheno.  The most important thought I would like to bring home via this thread is that LEAN is not tools!  "It is an end-to-end value stream that deliver competitiveness" by your man Bicheno, and "LEAN become even more powerful concept as it integrates with 'fast flexible flow', with TOC, with 'factory physics', with service concepts, with much of Six Sigma, and with ERP.  And LEAN is expanding into NEW areas far removed from repetitive manufacturing - LEAN construction, LEAN project management, LEAN health, LEAN service, and even, wait for  it, LEAN defence and LEAN public service." just to warm up your taste budds.  Maybe just a little bit more, Six Sigma and TOC as what I can figure out, come strongly into play, after according to Bicheno, the first 6 steps of his LEAN framework, the 6th being "Implementing the Lean Foundation Stones", within the 7th step, which is "The Value Stream Implementation Cycle", consist of 15 steps, the 8th being "Future state workshop", and its within this particular step which consist of various relevant tools, one of which consist of two STEPS, the first "Designing a Pull System with Heijunka, and the second "Cell and Line Design".  The first step consists of 19 substeps, of which the seventh substep is described as "Identify constraints convergences and variation" for which the relevant tools are TOC, Factory Physics and Six Sigma.  LEAN is evolving science in ART form. NOT to be taken lightly or to be sniffed at (as a white collor). Hint of Caution! The likes of Jeffrey Liker will prob tell ya in re to LEAN "Go find a sensei to learn from and enjoy the yourney!"  Well I think we all now that there are no senseis out there!  Only idiots who think they know everything about everything, and are quick to tell you all about it.  So allow me to revise slightly "Research LEAN (Six Sigma and TOC cause you're gonna need it also), study it, UNDERSTAND it, do it and enjoy the yourney!"  Become a Specialist in all three! Become an ARTIST! And make a difference or DIE trying! Go know! Don't just sit there with your mouth open! Go! Go! Go SERVE mankind!  

Bert,

I assume as a practical consultant you have been certified as a "Jonas" by the Goldratt Institute. So you probably have gone through some rigorous training and certification, i.e. no need to apologize for not being a "Six Sigma" professional!

If I understand Goldratt correctly, he has a very pragmatic approach which uses a combination of his own earlier work on systems theory and constraints, and lean and defect reduction tools as needed. He has also contributed some interesting and simple formulas that apply learnings from Johnston and Kaplan on the limitations of cost accounting, i.e. his defiinition of throughput accounting etc. He also realizes (with the old Japanese quality gurus) that most process problems can be solved using logic (including the logic of lean "principles" ... he may use the current and future reality trees, which differ somewhat from the Fishbone, but in the end, they have the same purpose). Finally, while he admits that one-piece flow may be optimal, he also sees that many real-world organizations will probably never do better than batch optimization, leaving it to Toyota to be the "shining light" and change existing organizations as much as needed to move the constraint to where it where it ideally is: the market (which is the premise of all micro-economics that it is better for an organization if the demand exceeds the supply ... go figure).

I think that rather than putting up these somewhat arbitrary barriers between TOC, lean and quality it is time to become pragmatic (rather than ideological) in applying an approach that best suits the needs of an organization. Motorrola did what was best for it. Toyota did the same. What companies can learn from them is to be innovative and realistic about their challenges rather than look for that silver bullet and "template" that will resolve all issues. In the end, we all agree that the best way to solve a problem is to "look for yourself" (use your brain and the formula when needed). Have a good evening!

Just in case you all think i'm mad...I'm not really...Just an industrial engineer currently doing my MASTERS in wait for it "Implementing BEST PRACTICES against the unique sosio-political background of South Africa"...I'm gonna have to recommend either or, or a combination of the three animals (LEAN, SIX SIGMA & TOC), or I might even have to develop a customized model myself of either or, or a combination of the three. Currently doing research on all three when I accidently stumbled upon Simons thread, unlucky/lucky for you all!!

Currently, I actually have no opinion as to which route to follow when it comes to these three animals.  I just know that LEAN is extremely misunderstood, undervalued and its complexity downplayed in the industry, its a LOT more complex folks then what people make it out to be.  LEAN is not simple, but simplicity pervades.  Furthermore, it's not so much an issue of complexity, as it is an issue in that it's about tacit knowledge, not explicit procedural knowledge, a craft type, unlike the other two animals.  A lot of myths out there re LEAN folks!  Be aware!  I also know that Six Sigma is made out to be a lot more complexed then it really is.  Its just strait forward stats folks, not advance stats for engineers! Plain stats, wrapped in Demings DMAIC.  Six Sigma for me is relatively straight forward and lacks complexity (even substance - localized optimization), to me its like a bull in a china shop!  Lacks people skills! Not to mention sustainability!  But if you are a Bull or an American for that matter, with plenty of people skills, and wants immediate impressive looking results, you'll achieve it with Six Sigma...through localised bull like improvements.  But I have a feeling cause it's localised the problem is gonna raise its ugly head somewhere down the line in a different form.  And TOC is also for me a little bit lacking in substance, and though it also lacks worker involvement or empowerment, its probably handy if your in a company or culture where you don't want to value the workers opinion for whatever reason...as you can see I actually dont have much clear direction either, it seems to me however at this junction that the answer lies in LEAN as the foundation, integrating at certain points, with among other animals, the likes of Six Sigma and TOC...One thing I do know at this point in time and that is that LEAN is at the CORE!!...will let you all know my conclusion/finding on this matter in oh! another year down the line...By the way I have no idea what Lean Six Sigma is yet!  Not conspired/concocted by the Japs, that much I can tell ya!  Books are huge and very intimidating looking, almost like the Six Sigma textbooks!  Maybe the Americans realized Six Sigma cant stand or exist by itself, therefore needs to lean on something (Joke)!...Happy trailings!

Hans,

Thank you.  You might find this study of interest.

http://www.advanced-projects.com/APICS_study.htm

It describes one company's experience implementing Lean, Six Sigma and TOC separately, and in combination and different plants that were sufficiently similar in circumstances as to represent a reasonably accepatable basis from which to draw some interesting conclusions.  One obvious question was never addressed by the study.  Can you tell which question I am refering to and why it might not have been addressed?  It isn't too difficult to use an ANOVA approach to deduce the isolated effect of TOC alone.  What do you think?

If you want to continue this one-on-one, contact me at let me know in your reply.

Peter,

I found your posting of particular interest. (I copied it into Word and used my artistic sensibility to paragraph it myself :-)

Cheers,

Andy

My $0.02 in this debate is a keep it simple one- and I make no apologies for recounting this, as its not my idea, but that of the guy who trained me to Black belt, but does a great job in defining the how Lean and Six Sigma go together.

Think of Six Sigma and Lean (include TOC here, like I said, KISS) as two separate sets in a Venn diagram. The commonalities (tools, approaches etc) in each set is where the 2 sets overlap. If your look critically, you will see that:

1) That the area of the intersection is greater than either of the remaining areas left outside the intersection.

2)  The intersection area contains the most practical and pragmatic approaches to Conintuous Improvement.

3) Tools and techniques left outside the intersection, are still valid and should not be dismissed. Its just that they probably dont get used that often.

Lastly and IMHO most importantly, Lean (and TOC) is about 'Doing the right things' (WIP and Leadtime reductions, JIT etc), and Six Sigma is about 'doing them right' - using the data to drive the improvements and to know when you've made a change (+ve or -ve).

BRgds

BGBB

Bert,

Thanks for pointing to the article. I couldn't help but analyze the conclusions drawn by the authors. I will look up the actual article later today. But it appeas to me as if they fell into some logical fallacies.

The authors claim that we can assume "linearity". That may be correct for the factor levels (TOC, Lean, Six Sigma), but this does not mean that they can multiple the added percentages by a factor of 6. As a matter of fact the way they present the data (without their raw data or at least a summary of the total costs and savings), they should have taken a weighted average, if not a geometric mean. In any case, by performing the calculation they did (6*(0.0063 + 0.015)) they greatly inflate the total savings (see calculations below). I will review the article later today, and see what other reasons the authors give for supporting their calculations and claims. As the summary of the article stands now, it sheds some serious doubts about the formulas and conclusions drawn by the authors. I'll be glad to contact you later.

Percentage Saved	Total Base	Total Savings
0.015	100	$        1.50
0.015	10000	$     150.00
0.015	1000	$      15.00
0.015	100000	$  1,500.00
0.0063	100	$        0.63
0.0063	1000	$        6.30
0.0063	10000	$      63.00
0.0063	100000	$     630.00
0.0063	100000	$     630.00
0.0063	10000	$      63.00
0.0063	1000	$        6.30
0.0063	1000	$        6.30
0.0063	10	$        0.06
0.0063	10	$        0.06
0.0063	1000	$        6.30
Assuming  arithmetic mean of 15 percentages	Total Cost	Total Savings	Actual Percentage savings based on added savings and dividing by total cost
0.86%	$335,220.00	$  3,078.46	0.92%
Assuming formula by authors			Inflaction factor of actual savings vs. claimed savings
12.78%	$335,220.00	$42,841.12	13.92

Andy,

Good on ya mate!

Did it look something like the following?

I know the thread from Simon "LEAN is Art" and "Six Sigma is Science" is Nov05...it’s just I couldn’t help myself to add to it even if it is almost a year on - it brought such a feeling of WOW!

Somebody actually managed to hit the nail on the head. 

CONGRATS! If there was a price I would give it to you Sir Simon!

Allow me to embroil further just a little! "LEAN is Science in Art Form" - probably the reason why so many companies fail to copy it.  It CAN'T be copied!  It’s an art form. 

You have to become an ARTIST, not just you, everybody in the company, not just any artist, but an ARTIST, like Rembrandt.  Toyota is a painting like "Die Nagwag" from Rembrandt, and it gets worse folks! It’s evolving, it gets better and better all the time (almost like us humans species, if you are a sucker enough to believe that mantra which is called evolution, but that’s a completely different thread and day).

Have you seen the Lexus? Just the only of its kind in the world, and its selling. 

Toyota is light years ahead of the pack (that’s you and me so by the way)...number 8 in the world...only second to the oil giants, the retail giant, General Motors (which is struggling so by the way - we're all waiting in anticipation to see whether Carlos "The Great" will come to its rescue), Chevron and DaimlerChrysler. 

Have any of you folks actually ever visited Toyota Japan website?  There's some info on the TPS and some VIDEOS of the plant in ACTION.  Go watch it! You might understand Sir Simon's revelation re LEAN...It is art. 

Six Sigma on the other hand is STATS on STEROIDS...if you folks don't mind me saying so...which I guess is science or business science or whatever.  The important thing is it can be COPIED.  It was designed to copy...still require intelligence. 

For you folks who still can't make head or tail between LEAN, Six Sigma and TOC, I recommend "The NEW LEAN Toolbox" by John Bicheno. 

The most important thought I would like to bring home via this thread is that LEAN is not tools!  "It is an end-to-end value stream that deliver competitiveness" by your man Bicheno.

"LEAN become even more powerful concept as it integrates with 'fast flexible flow', with TOC, with 'factory physics', with service concepts, with much of Six Sigma, and with ERP.” 

“And LEAN is expanding into NEW areas far removed from repetitive manufacturing - LEAN construction, LEAN project management, LEAN health, LEAN service, and even, wait for  it, LEAN defence and LEAN public service." just to warm up your taste butts. 

Maybe just a little bit more, Six Sigma and TOC as what I can figure out, come strongly into play, after according to Bicheno, the first 6 steps of his LEAN framework, the 6th being "Implementing the Lean Foundation Stones", within the 7th step, which is "The Value Stream Implementation Cycle", consist of 15 steps, the 8th being "Future state workshop", and its within this particular step which consist of various relevant tools, one of which consist of two STEPS, the first "Designing a Pull System with Heijunka, and the second "Cell and Line Design".  The first step consists of 19 sub steps, of which the seventh sub step is described as "Identify constraints convergences and variation" for which the relevant tools are TOC, Factory Physics and Six Sigma. 

LEAN is evolving science in ART form. NOT to be taken lightly or to be sniffed at (as a white collar). 

Hint of Caution! The likes of Jeffrey Liker will probably tell you in re to LEAN "Go find a sensei to learn from and enjoy the journey!" 

Well I think we all know that there are no sensei’s out there! 

Only idiots who think they know everything about everything, and are quick to tell you all about it. 

So allow me to revise slightly "Research LEAN (Six Sigma and TOC cause you're gonna need it also), study it, UNDERSTAND it, do it and enjoy the journey!" 

Become a Specialist in all three!

Become an ARTIST!

And make a difference or DIE trying!

Go know! Don't just sit there with your mouth open! 

Go! Go!

Go SERVE mankind! 

Just in case you all think I'm mad...I'm not really...Just an industrial engineer currently doing my MASTERS in wait for it "Implementing BEST PRACTICES against the unique social-political background of South Africa"...

 

I'm gonna have to recommend either or, or a combination of the three animals (LEAN, SIX SIGMA & TOC), or I might even have to develop a customized model myself of either or, or a combination of the three.

 

Currently doing research on all three when I accidentally stumbled upon Simons thread, unlucky/lucky for you all!!

 

Currently, I actually have no opinion as to which route to follow when it comes to these three animals. 

 

I just know that LEAN is extremely misunderstood, undervalued and its complexity downplayed in the industry, its a LOT more complex folks then what people make it out to be. 

 

LEAN is not simple, but simplicity pervades. 

 

Furthermore, it's not so much an issue of complexity, as it is an issue in that it's about tacit knowledge, not explicit procedural knowledge, a craft type, unlike the other two animals. 

 

A lot of myths out there re LEAN folks!  Be aware! 

 

I also know that Six Sigma is made out to be a lot more complex then it really is. 

 

Its just strait forward stats folks not advance stats for engineers!

 

Plain stats, wrapped in Demings DMAIC. 

 

Six Sigma for me is relatively straight forward and lacks complexity (even substance - localized optimization), to me it’s like a bull in a china shop!  Lacks people skills! Not to mention sustainability! 

 

But if you are a Bull or an American for that matter, with plenty of people skills, and wants immediate impressive looking results, you'll achieve it using Six Sigma – through localised bull like improvements. 

 

But I have a feeling cause it's localised the problem is gonna raise its ugly head somewhere down the line in a different form. 

 

And TOC is also for me a little bit lacking in substance, and though it also lacks worker involvement or empowerment…it’s probably handy if you are in a company or culture where you don't want to value the workers opinion for whatever reason...

 

As you can see I actually don’t have much clear direction either, it seems to me however at this junction that the answer lies in LEAN as the foundation, integrating at certain points, with among other animals, the likes of Six Sigma and TOC...

 

One thing I do know at this point in time and that is that LEAN is at the CORE!!

 

...will let you all know my conclusion/finding on this matter in oh! Another year down the line...

 

By the way I have no idea what Lean Six Sigma is yet! 

 

Not conspired/concocted by the Japs, that much I can tell ya! 

 

Books are huge and very intimidating looking, almost like the Six Sigma textbooks! 

 

Maybe the Americans realized Six Sigma cant stand or exist by itself, therefore needs to lean on something (Joke)!

 

Happy trailing!

LEAN focuses on waste while SIX SIGMA focuses on minimizing the variation after waste have been reduced. Both concerns improvements

LEAN focuses on waste = Nr 1 Biggest myth re LEAN

Waste elimination is a means to achieving the LEAN ideal – it is NOT an end in itself!!!

 

Allow me then to quote from Bicheno’s new book (“” “”):

 

“”George Davidson, retired manufacturing director of Toyota South Africa, says that the first principle of the TPS (LEAN) is “the customer first”.  And, George, how do you do that? “By creating thinking people”, says he.  And how do you do that, George? “By creating workplaces and organizations that are more human”. 

 

Note what Davidson is NOT saying. 

 

It is not primarily about waste; waste is removed because you want to improve benefits to the customer. 

 

Hence Toyota is not averse to adding inventory where necessary – as indeed they have done recently. 

 

It is not about 5S – 5S is just a tool for consistency and quality. 

 

It is not about SMED – SMED is just a tool for improving response time and service to the customer. 

 

LEAN developed from first principles, with the customer in mind.

 

In fact NON-LEAN systems do just the opposite.  For instance, through “economic order quantities”, “mass-production”, long lead times, reduced variety, “push” systems, and the location of plants in China purely for cost – all of which are designed with the producer in mind, not the customer!

 

One way of understanding LEAN is to view it as a (proven) approach to dispense with increasingly inappropriate ‘economies of scale’ and to adopt ‘economies of time’.

 

LEAN is not tools!!””

 

LEAN focuses on Waste Prevention

 

LEAN focuses on Value

 

LEAN focuses on System

 

LEAN focuses on Process

 

LEAN focuses on Revolution and Evolution

 

LEAN focuses on Distributed Decisions

 

LEAN focuses on Service

 

LEAN focuses on Built to Order

 

LEAN focuses on Green

 

“”LEAN is only beginning

 

LEAN is Core

 

Hopefully the days of arguing between “LEAN vs AGILE”, “LEAN vs APS”, “LEAN and Six Sigma”, “LEAN and TOC”, “LEAN and Manufacturing Strategy”, and the practice of including one chapter on LEAN (or JIT) in operations management textbooks, is passing.

 

Perhaps not – academics are often the last to change! 

 

LEAN is at the CORE.  The principles are universal.  It is merely a question of the extent to which other concepts can add to the central developing CORE of LEAN, and vice versa.

 

Furthermore, there are 20 characteristics of LEAN, but I think you all get the picture.

 

Finally re LEAN & Six Sigma:

 

They are no longer at odds, nor should they be.  LEAN is better at the big picture, at establishing the foundation through activities such as 5S and standard operations, whilst Six Sigma offers a powerful problem solving methodology through DMAIC.  The LEAN value stream mapping tools are generally superior but synergistic with those used in Six Sigma, and concepts such as cellular manufacturing, quality at source, pokayoke, and TPM are entirely synergistic.  Six Sigma has shown a lead in the costing of projects, something that is under-developed in LEAN.  There are however also doubtful practices in Six Sigma, as pointed out by one of the originators, Keki Bhote ex-Motorola quality guru.

 

However, much of Six Sigma itself is waste! What can be done to reduce or eliminate that variation before it even arises should be the prime question.

 

Why is Toyota not falling over itself to get after Six Sigma or alternatively how is it been able to achieve Six Sigma levels of performance without legions of black belts and statistical software?””

 

Good show Peter!!!!!!

Mikel, jumping ship , perhaps you can implement LEAN on those junk comic books you put out that are an affront to any civilized logical person. You know , the white and black one.

Thanks! I aim 2 pleace!

Guilty as charged!  It was fun though...my very ever first blog...and this 1 my last.

I was looking at all that you wrote and thought in short could this summarize your work.

 

Lean is an interpretation or representation of the Toyota Production System.  Given everyone can interpret what he or she sees differently, no wonder there are those that say; “Lean is about waste elimination”, “Lean is about 5S”, or “Lean is about ____”.

 

Rather, Lean is a part of the whole (the TPS).  So all that is considered Lean can be found in TPS, BUT all that is the Toyota Production System is not found in Lean.  TPS is the complete system, not an interpretation of another system or a part of the whole.

 

I sat in a presentation by John Shook and he commented, TPS is about

1. Creating an environment in which the abnormal can be distinguished from the normal,
2. Developing a workforce that knows what the right thing is to do when they encounter the abnormal, and  (I believe this is why there are those at Toyota that refer to TPS as the Thinking Production System.)
3. Empowering your workforce to do the right thing.

Notice there is nothing in there about waste.  However, if you think about every tool within the Lean toolbox it applies to a part of this statement (primarily #1).  And for those that are successful in implementing Lean, numbers 2 & 3 were applied.  But where it failed, they forgot about numbers 2 and/or 3.

EdG: Thanks for sharing these three points of TPS, Thinking Production System. But, when you reduce the thinking from this TPS, what is left, Lean Thinking, or the Lean System, one without thinking, just doing.

That's why TPS discourage layoffs, while with Lean Thinking, layoffs is the first expectation.

Paul

Paul,

This is why I stressed that all that is Lean is found within TPS but not all that is TPS is within Lean.  Those that are truely successful with Lean look to the source, TPS, and add to it that which they realize they are lacking.  Those that are not successful merely take it at face value, given whomever taught them, and then screw it up with layoffs and the like.

To really be successful one must study and follow the original, TPS.  Don't get me wrong, my company has brought in "Lean consultants" to help.  But I don't only listen to them, I still keep going back to TPS (via many sources) and try to add to that which is missing.

Just a little advice.  No one has to listen if they don't want to...

EdG

LEAN = TPS = The TOYOTA WAY = the source. 

The moment you place a verb after, or an adjective before LEAN, you are busy with segregation.  Think about it.  Hence the reason for the hybrid between Six Sigma and TPS is called LEAN Six Sigma (if that is what Lean Six Sigma is supposed to be).

Further, on the topic of segregation (which so by the way should take the blame for when LEAN doesn’t bare fruit), according to Bicheno Mechanical LEAN is the implementation of LEAN tools in a piecemeal fashion.  Managerial LEAN is the implementation of LEAN tools in an integrated manner.  Innovation LEAN takes LEAN beyond the shop floor, beyond the organization to create new opportunity, value and customers.  LEAN often begins with Mechanical (Demonstration) and since piecemeal benefits are small, executives may then decide to abandon the LEAN initiative, claiming they have done LEAN and it didn’t do them much good.

LEAN = End-to-end evolving value stream that delivers competitiveness.

Another point to ponder is that the missing ingredient in most companies trying to implement LEAN is the principle which is the foundation for all the other LEAN principles namely PHILOSOPHY.  Toyota gives us a glimpse of an alternative, provides a model of what happens when tens of thousands of people are aligned toward a common purpose that is bigger than making money.

This common purpose being to SERVE mankind!

A great read I can offer the Western World to maybe aid in their pursuit to implement LEAN is the business book "Lead like Jesus" by Ken Blanchard and Phil Hodges (and use the KJV to do the necessary cross referencing). 

I disagree with LEAN = TPS.

Lean is not ALL that TPS is.  It is a copy but it is not the ORIGINAL.  You go to Vegas and see Elvis impersonators all around.  Some may be very good and some may be terrible, but NONE is the original.

Lean would be comparable to that.  It is an impersonation, but it is not the original.

I  believe  Lean is  Lean and  TPS is  TPS,we  should  not  mix  them  up.Human  Mind  is usually  like  to  make  comparisons all  the  way without any  useful  conclusion (in  some  cases).

Ed,

...But surely then you don't...disagree.

...in the ideal state LEAN = TPS, in reality, sadly, it's not the case due to mankind's nature to loose sight of the original message and drift away from it (exactly like the Gospel).

You've mentioned that every now and again you go back to the source, can you kindly elaborate (titles/authors)? Will help with my thesis on this matter (don't mind if i have to add TPS as a fourth animal, along side LEAN - just would like to get to the bottom of what has suddenly become bit of an issue for me).

 Peter

Marlon,

Where is TPS documented, other then Jeffrey Liker's "The Toyota Way" and the sequel "The Toyota Way - Fieldbook" (I presume these 2 books qualify)?

Peter

If you go to amazon.com and do a quick search, you'll find sufficient documentation written by Toyota engineers and Japanese academics that will give you a detailed historical overview of the TPS system. I always thought that the literature research was a prerequisite for a successful thesis. I, for my part, get pretty annoyed by the ramblings of an amateur intellectual who has neither academic nor professional experience nor credentials.

Peter,

You write as though you are an expert on lean. Are you? What is your thesis about, I would be really interested. I am interested in lean myself and it would be great to share some references etc.

Thanks

Paul

Paul,

 

Hardly!  As my new found fan has so sweetly and lovingly pointed out.

 

Bachelors in Industrial Engineering, with 3 years experience in Construction Project Management (Anglo America & Intel) and 2 years in FMCG (SMT & PCB Fabrication), who recently embarked on a thesis in relation to “Implementing BEST PRACTICES against the unique social-political background of the Republic of South Africa”,

 

Just recently started with Phase 1 – Literature Research,

 

LEAN, Six Sigma and TOC will be my focus…and from what I now gather from EdG, I should treat TPS separate from LEAN…still trying to get 2 the bottom of that aspect…I was/am under the impression they were/are the same.

 

Would love to exchange references – one of my many personal local e-mails (which I can delete, just in case I get harassed by fans) is pietersburgerwebmail.co.za, this site probably not the vehicle for that…

 

Peter

Although I like Dr. Liker’s book, he doesn’t have the corner market on TPS.

 

There is Toyota Production System by Taiichi Ohno, A Study of the Toyota Production System by Shigeo Shingo, The Evolution of a Manufacturing Systems at Toyota by Takahiro Fujimoto, and Toyota Production System by Yasuhiro Monden.

 

I could go on but I think you get the message.  Like I said I also like Liker’s book.  And I also like Dr. Steven Spear's works.

Peter,

Lean is a copy of TPS.  Some come to a more close representation than others...

By the way, I would offer up as you understand more of TOC you may see similarities between it and Lean.  I would say that they (both Lean and TOC) are different interpretations of the same system, the Toyota Production System.  Just Goldrath latched on to the supply chain/constraints aspect and Womack was more focused on waste elimination and problem solving.  There are many that would say I am wrong, but it is just my opinion.

Good luck...

I got out from this forum probably all I need for my little thesis, so you people at Isixsigma can relax again...I'm sure there are lots of idiots in America that will turn the tide back towards Six Sigma (America's desperate answer to TPS) 4 yr precious forum 2 look good, and no need to send in troops to try an annihilate anybody who dares 2 take the lime light away from Six Sigma...remember 2 delete this 1 also.

Just so by the way, if yr lady “guerilla” troop just politely and with RESPECT explained to me who she was and that the whole LEAN discussion is not exactly beneficial to the forum at hand I would’ve bowed apologetically and would’ve vacated immediately…but your chosen tactics, frankly speaking is nothing short of DISGUSTING – nogals in die naam van “PROFESSIONALISM”.  Ironically, this sort of thing is exactly what your product LACKS; respect 4 people…I would recommend u people from isixsigma delete this 2 and hopefully learn something from it!!

Ed,

Thanks Buddy! Appreciate it! 4 opening my eyes re LEAN vs. TPS!

I think I happen 2 agree with u re TOC vs LEAN, never really thought about it like that!  Great stuff! Only diffs re TOC with respect 2 TPS is he 4 some reason decided 2 cling on 2 pushing the product..as suppose 2 pull it...?

Peter

Ed,

My personal e-mail is pietersburgerwebmail.co.za

Sent me a tester!

I would luv 2 bounce things of ya from time 2 time as i progress through my little thesis!

Best Rgds

Peter

I hope you are finally man enough (as that seems to be of higher value in your deranged world view than being a woman) to keep your promises and leave this site alone with your psychopathic ramblings ... how do you even know I am in American? You naive fool? ... si tacuisses ...

Ed,

So who have the corner market on TPS? Ohno, Shingo, Fujimoto & Monden? U said u could go on? Does Spear fall in the group that has the corner market? And do I then classify “The Toyota Way” and “The Toyota Way Fieldbook” by Liker together with the rest (Womack) under LEAN?  Are there books re specific TPS tools that belong in the corner market on TPS like for example maybe “Just-In-Time 4 America” by Kenneth Wantuck and “One-Piece-Flow” by Kenichi Sekine? I’m not 2 faced with titles (2 daunting a task) – it’s the authors that I’m after (the people with the, know how).  Thanking you in advance.  My private e-mail address pietersburgerwebmail.co.za

Peter

Very Sad. Don’t forget 2 delete. Not good 4 yr business. J

U can give out, but u cant take! U should wise up or stay out of the kitchen!

So let's summarize this discussion: Peter is a xenophobic, homophobic, christian fundamentalist who is prejudiced against women. I congratulate you for showing who you truly are to such a large audience.

And I promise and keep the promise (unlike our bigoted, hippocritical, egomaniac friend) not to respond any more. Have a good life!

Peter,

You may wonder why you created such as strong reaction. What caught my attention was the tone of your first postings and your responses. We see a lot of "novices" on this site, but few of them start out with such strong opinions supported by so little knowledge.

So I wanted to know more about you and your background, and what better way to do that than to put someone into an emotional state and see their reactions. What I saw was less than flattering. Even though I do apologize for using the terms "fool", "bigoted" and "hippocritical". Egomaniac to some degree is more to the point. You'll have to live with your religion, your atttitude towards America and to women and the gay population in general. I think you still have some growing up to do in this area but that is is just my personal opinion.

Now to my point: You wondered why I did not contribute "substantially" to your discussion thread. Reason: You were (and maybe are) not ready for the key message.

Any of the initiatives (Six Sigma, Lean or TOC) requires personalities with a strong yet flexible background in the art of changing a business. Work in this area is more like a boxing match or bushido where you don't just walk into the ring as an amateur telling everyone they have no clue and expect to walk away without getting bruises in the real fight. This is what many consultants do, and currently we see a wave of online certifications that does not prepare the so-called GBs and BBs for the real job.

Starting from this premise you can look at them as different fighting techniques such as Tae Kwon Do, Karate, bare knuckle boxing etc. You'll gain much more insight into the different approaches when you look at them as different techniques to stay competitive in a specific environment. In a street fight (and true businesses are more like street fights than like regulated boxing matches) you'll do what you can do to win and survive. I hope this exchange has focused you more on the true goal and essence of the techniques.

Master Black Belts are Master Black Belts for a reason: they train and coach the BBs and GBs through the brutal game of corporate change initiatives. A Jonas has gone through the excruciating training of Elias Goldratt. He is well known for tearing people apart who are not up to the game. And for a good reason. You don't ever want to look like a fool in front of a CEO.

Maybe your first step in your thesis may be to try to understand what these methods are about and what professionals in this area are up against. After that you can start criticing the different approaches in terms of which is most effective in the street fights of Corporate competition.

In conclusion, consider our exchange as an exchange in the sense of Goldratt's Socratic method. I wasn't exactly the nicest, but I think it was overdue to give you a better sense of reality (which still exists even though the Internet creates the impression of an only virtual reality).

 Best regards!

I suggest  the  following  formula:

TQM (TQC)+Kaizen+SS+Lean+Lean-SS+Change Management+Project Management+ETC...=The  Best  Quality (or  management) practices.Forget  about TPS or GE,Do-Pont,IBM,Motorola,AlliedSignal....etc.Just  gather the  best  practices from  all  those  companies.Good  suggestion  for  a  new  "best-seller" book??

I  forget  to  add"TOC"?

I'm  interested  to have  a  copy  of  the  book  "the  Toyota  Way",please let  me  know the  author and  the  publisher name,thanks

I  suggest  Lean-SS

An excellent  answer

An  out-standing wrapping-up?I'm  preparing a  new PPT on  the  subject "Lean-SS" containing some  100 slides,using  some  12 advances  references (books,links ,articles,training  material...etc). 

Agree.Please  elaborate  more  on  the  role  of  consultants in  regard to  utilizing those  tools,thanks

Peter,

 

Have you tried expanding your literature review to the academic field?

Two examples to get you started:

 

Hines, P., Holweg, M. & Rich, N. (2004) Learning to Evolve: A Review of Contemporary Lean Thinking. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24, No. 10, pp. 994-1011

 

Lewis, M. A. (2000) Lean Production and Sustainable Competitive Advantage. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp. 959-978

 

What level of study are you working to, Masters or Doctorate?

How have you defined best practice?

Isn't every implementation instigating change unique to the situation?

 

Good luck

 

Paul

Dear Amagdala

I’ve ate the meat and I’ve spat out the bones.

The biggest bone being the majority paragraphs based on using FEAR tactics in order to separate the men from the boys…even though this is sadly reality, it doesn’t mean the solution is to become a self-serving leader or street fighter in order to win and survive...to live your life in this manner is a live wasted…there is another way…the way of a servant leader.

The meat – paragraph 4; I apologies if I came over as a pro, I guess maybe that was my tactic combined with the tactic of “stepping on toes” (have nothing against women or America – gay people need 2 go and read Romans 1:24-32, KJV) to get the attention of the pro’s to help me in my quest 2 get 2 the bottom of certain issues...it worked 2 a certain degree.  By the way, professing to be in God, or saved, or born-again, by no means equate to professing you’re an angel.  I’m just as bad as you are, if not worse, and will always b this way.  One is suppose 2 grow though…but it takes discipline and full heartiness…in order to allow God more control over one’s life…and only then “shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with new wine” Proverbs 2:10, KJV.

By the way, FEAR, is a gift from God…but FEAR God, thus keeping your FOCUS on God…in order to enhance life…being agitated by fear of man into fight-or-flight thinking and behaviour is life threatening in the most personal and profound way.

Best Rgds

Peter

PS! If u wish (although somehow I doubt it) to continue this discussion, pietersburgerwebmail.co.za ...this is hardly the place!

The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles From The World's Greatest Manufacturer

Author: Dr. Jeffery Liker

Publisher: McGraw-Hill

ISBN: 0071392319

 

The Toyota Way Fieldbook

Author: Dr. Jeffery Liker & David Meier

Publisher: McGraw-Hill

ISBN: 0071448934

 

Another great text is:

New Shop Floor Management: Empowering People for Continuous Improvement

Author: Kiyoshi Suzaki

Publisher: Free Press

ISBN: 0029322650

- This text was suggested to me by a former TMMK employee.  Great read…

Happy reading...

It's been a while since we have had a true nut on here. Stick around for a while Peter.

Sorry, can't stick around...have to split! My work is done here!

Great.Thank  You

I'd say: two nuts ... makes for a healthy laughter.

Wow, and to think I missed most of this thread.  It was getting a little too long winded for my limited attention span.  Peter certainly had some strong opinions.  I sensed that there were some posters whose style looked familiar despite their creative new posting names.  Possibly Peter could be nominated for the J. O. Club should it pull a Phoenix....the bird, not the city.  Did receive a personal offline email from Joe BB who wanted Peter's email address and phone number.  Could be a nice match.

Hans,

I look forward to the results of your analyis.  Here is a temporary email address you can use to contact me.  Be sure to to include Lean vs Sixsigma in the subject line.  Thanks.

toyota2003camryyahoo .

Bert

Paul,

 

Academic Field? Negative, the idea is 2 obtain my Masters in order 2 implement (SERVE mankind while at the same time coining it as much as possible), when I reach my 50s I’ll do my Doctorate and write best sellers, sipping red wine while gazing over the sea (flood waters), as I’m doing as we speak J.

 

Best practice? The most likely to succeed business engineering philosophy in a generically pre-defined profit seeking environment?  WIP

 

Every implementation instigates change unique to the situation? Absolutely, hence why as part of my little thesis I would have to against the unique social-political background of the RSA generically define a range of typical applications, and model each application type.  Using the “VAT classification”, looking at the types of processes (Conversion, Fabrication, Assembly, Testing), process flow structures (Job Shop, Batch, Assembly Line, Continuous Flow), will help covering manufacturing industries, where with the services industries, one could cover using the same terms plus that one additional item, namely the extent of customer contact in the creation of the service (high degree or low degree of customer contact).  One distinctive characteristic of services of course is that one cannot inventory services.

 

Ta

Peter

Not threatened - entertained.

I hope you stick around.

Then, having glorified LEAN, I can’t help but wonder, since Japan is ALL about image, how much of LEAN is image or myth or cognitive dissonance? 

 

For that matter how much of Six Sigma and TOC is cognitive dissonance? 

 

And finally, what level of relationship exists between the Deming management method and Buffalo Bill Cody’s Wild West Show?

Lean or Six Sigma?

In his article “Putting Six Sigma in Perspective”<!--[if !supportFootnotes]-->[1]<!--[endif]-->, Michael Hammer uses the mantra: “Use the right tool for the right problem”. An excerpt that summarizes what he means (he uses the term “process redesign”, which in this context is synonymous with Lean):

“Process redesign leads to a new mode of operation rather than correct execution of the existing mode; it has stretch rather than incremental goals; it centers on creative invention rather than structured problem-solving; it entails a small number of large projects rather than a large number of small ones; and perhaps most significantly it leads to major rather than minor organizational change.

“Six Sigma offers “small bore solutions to small bore problems. This is not said pejoratively. Most problems that enterprises encounter are small bore, and having a tool that will consistently find the right solution for them is a significant achievement.

“But not all business problems are small bore. Some cannot be traced to a narrow and well-defined defect. These problems result from fundamental flaws in the overall design of a process, not from minor flaws in its execution. Six Sigma can isolate and solve problems within an existing framework, but it is powerless to create an alternative framework.”

We sometimes use the chart below as a discussion guide while helping clients choose the right tool.

	Six Sigma	Lean
Goal	Specific, localized solution	Pervasive cultural transformation
Scope	Narrowly defined problem (“final test pass variation”)	Enterprise-wide (“call-to-cash”, “time-to-market”)
Situation	Hard to diagnose, easy to fix	Easy to define, hard to achieve and sustain
Assumption	Within existing framework	Challenges current thinking
Mentality	“What” and “How”	“Why” and “Why not”
Method	DMAIC thought process	PDCA scientific method
Sponsor	Operations or Quality	Senior leadership
Involvement	“Experts”- Black belts, IEs	Champions inspiring “everyone, everyday”
Result	One time improvement	“Kaikaku”- rapid, radical change followed by “Kaizen”- continuous, incremental improvement

Probably one of the most poorly researched articles out there. I am a proponent of both systems and have implemented both.  Shows just how easy it is to get published these days.

I started to pick apart each of the items, but the post got too long.  Every statement on the left side of the table is wrong.  Every right side statement should be on the left side except 2 of them - PDCA (because 6sig uses DMAIC) and the result (becuase we don't 6sig's control stage by a japanese name).

It is a shame people read and believe this drivel.  If the methodology is implemented as designed, then 6sigma is a cultural driver and change agent.  However, just like lean - if it's implemented as a project, it will be a  project.

A very inventive if not tenuous chart.

I would be interested in knowing what happens when you have somone in the audience who actually understands Lean or SS, must get quite tricky

Just my thoughts

H.

I'm not so sure I'd be quite that hard on it ... well, the "drivel" part I agree with.

*BUT*, if the Six Sigma program is sponsored by the "quality" department, then almost everything in his left hand column will probably be a characteristic of the SS program.  Sadly, that is true too often.

There have been plenty of programs where there tend to be localized solutions, unsustained gains, cowardly approaches that won't challenge how things are done, one-time improvements; all these are symptoms of failing to get real commitment from the top.

I don't know from experience, but I suspect that a Lean initiative driven by operations (somehow it doesn't fit well with quality), and without top management commitment, would have similar limitations.

--McD

Can you send me the article as well. My e-mail address is anurag_100yahoo.com

You can get the article at Lean.org.  You will need to sign up as a member to be able to access it.  Someone else back in 2005 posted a link to the article.

http://www.lean.org/

In my opinion, Lean Six Sigma is the same as Six Sigma was originally--or at least the way I was taught Six Sigma by Juran Corporation.  Originally, the emphasis of Six Sigma, as I was taught, was on measuring the process steps and this included waste, rework, and identifying ways to make the process leaner.  But over the years I've watched Six Sigma evolve away from measuring the *process* to measuring the *performance*.  I'm not sure why it evolved other than that a lot of BBs I knew and worked with didn't want to bother measuring the process steps; most of their process problems dealt with "low hanging fruit" and they could solve it by just measuring the results instead of the process.  Once Six Sigma became easy, everybody started doing it.  At the same time, though, most of these people started finding that Six Sigma (the new easy way) was not all that it was advertised to be.  They weren't getting break-through improvement like they were promised and they started to give up on Six Sigma.  Of course they didn't get the results they expected, they weren't measuring the process steps anymore.  So, it seemed that someone came along and said, "what if me married Six Sigma and Lean?" and Lean Six Sigma was born.  Low and behold, we had something that worked again.  With Lean  Six Sigma, people were seeing break-through improvement again and Lean Six Sigma became popular.  But it wasn't any different, really, than the original Six Sigma as I understood it from Harry and Shroeder's book.  Now that we have Lean Six Sigma, I sure hope it doesn't evolve like Six Sigma did.

I am curious.  Why do you think Six Sigma evolved the way it did?

Just a thought but, could it have evolved from measuring the *process* to measuring the *performance* because measuring the *process* is more of a challenge? 

To measure the process I must go to the gemba (the real place) to view the genbutsu (the real things) and establish the genjitsu (the real facts) of the process.  This means I have to go to that dirty place known as the shop floor and speak with the folks on the floor. 

Where as measuring the *performance* I can stay in an antiseptic environment (the office) and pull numbers and data out of a database in order to analyze for performance.  Now I don’t have to deal with the people, only my computer.  Nor do I have to get dirty.  And after solving all of life’s mysteries, I can send out my conclusions via e-mail.

 I hadn’t thought of this until I read your post, but this just struck me…  Then again, maybe I am crazy…

EdG,

You're not crazy .. you consistently make good sense.

Andy

This is the fundamenatl difference between lean and six sigma engineers.

Lean engineers practise genchi gembutsu while six sigma engineers embrace a PC loaded with minitab.

Orang Utan, that's a good one :-).

EdG,

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who has lost his mind over the antiseptic number crunching exercises performed under the name of six sigma. Funny, I still like to read the original texts of Japanese engineers.

Cool.  And the folks I work with thought I was nutz...  Although I am reading an english translation.

Lean has to do with removing "waste" in the System. That promotes speed and cost savings.  Six Sigma deals with reducing variation and improving quality in the process and product.  They are meant to work together.  An experienced, trained Lean Sigma MBB would better understand when and how to apply each.

Duly noted and filed for future reference :-).

It looks like I'm entering this thread late, to say the least. But here's how I see it. There have been three HUGE initiatives in the past 30 years or so: quality/TQM, Six Sigma, and Lean. All three started long before they became popular (Post WWII.) I believe all are related and fall under the umbrella of systems and industrial engineering.
As I see it, the essence of each approach is as follows:

QUALITY is doing the right things right. This means that (1) you've identified what the right things are, perhaps by studying the VOC, and (2) you have systems in place to assure that they are done right and to take appropriate action when they are not. Quality implies that you're not doing the wrong things, i.e., things that the customer does not want.

Six Sigma focuses on modeling complex business processes and using the models to improve performance rapidly. A model is an explicit, logical linkage of outcomes to root causes. Many, but not all, Six Sigma models are mathematical. If the linkage between causes and outcomes is already known, there is no need for Six Sigma. As always, all models are wrong, but some models are useful. Six Sigma goes somewhat beyond SIE because using the models to improve requires a significant management component. Since many of the improvements involve customers, Six Sigma and Quality are linked.

Lean systematically identifies and eliminates waste in value streams. This requires that you know what the organization's value streams are and can identify waste defined as non-value added activities. Since value is defined by customers, Lean is linked to Quality. In many cases Lean can be applied without Six Sigma because the linkage between the waste and its causes is well understood. However, when the root cause of waste isn't known, Six Sigma provides important tools and techniques for modeling it. Thus, Lean is linked to Six Sigma as well.

In summary:
Quality is working better.
Lean is working efficiently.
Six Sigma is working smarter.

Oops the previous note was targeted towards the Deming Student.

Your email made my day! :-)  I think you've right on with your reasoning.

My lean and six sigma DMAIC chart.

This is a great posting and response. Very proactive. I am in Healthcare and I am looking into Lean or SS. After reading this, I think I will do both.

Thanks

Peter,

Thank you, Thank you!!

I am in the middle of decision making right now to take lean or SS. Big bucks involved. I am in Healthcare, Project management, no PMP yet. Want to try LEAN. Thanks for your posting

TQM / Deming incorporates both Lean and SS but without all the BS.

Lean Operating Concepts  were  developed  by the  Japanese (TPS),and  later  in  the  USA as  "Lean".It  was  based  on  the works of  Taichi Ohno,Taguchi,Shigeo Shingo,Deming,Juran and  others.Lean  and  SS have  many common sources with  modern Lean  approaches.

Good  Luck 

BS stands  for  what?

Bovine excrement

What  does  that  mean?

There is a handy little tool called the English language dictionary.  First, look up the word "bovine."  Then, look up the word "excrement."  A black belt should be able to 1) do the research on their own and, 2) figure it out for themselves.

Thank You  for  being  cooperative?My  next question:Please  clarify  the  difference  between Leading  Measure and  Lagging  Measure?

Marlon,

Regarding Leading indicators vs. lagging indicators -- here are some recent iSixSigma discussion board postings about this topic:

http://www.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=107993

http://www.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=107995

Best regards.

QualityColorado

Thank You.Appreciate  your cooperation.

Any chance of getting this article of Lean vs Sigma vs TOC. I'd very much appreciate it.

Thanks,

Richard

Here's the link to the article by Dave Nave.

http://www.lean.org/Community/Registered/ShowDocument.cfm?FileName=ASQStoryonQualitySigmaAndLean.pdf 

Hi Erik, regarding your concerns of what is a better approach, which tool to use and benefits regarding lean or Six sigma implementations I’d probably say in agreement with other lean consultants that both work well together and each one compliments the other. I see Lean as a conglomerate of useful tools that help you evidence muda in you supply chain and with the use of other tools like Six Sigma you can isolate and reduce variation needs that you identified lean wise. You need both to get the most benefits out of the initiative but if you’d have to pick one because of cost restraints, Go Lean!

 

Leansite Advise Panel

http://www.leansite.net

Why not simply follow Deming, as highly successful companies such as Toyota do ? 

Deming's principles combine Lean and Six Sigma ... but without all of Six Sigma's fallacies and nonsence that were added by Mikel Harry.

Rev. Falwell sure doesn't need our help in building an efficient and profitable money machine.  Many of us just keep praying that the LSS phenomenon will continue until the End of Days or retirement which ever comes first. 

Dr. Smith,

You'll like this in terms of Dr. Harry being the "grandfather" of Six Sigma. The newest pitch is as follows: We are now living in the 3rd generation of Six Sigma: Generation one was all about defect reduction, generation two was about "cost savings" and generation three is now about "value creation" (Dr. Harry says that this is also called "Lean Six Sigma :-).. You'll probably be familiar with Dr. Harry's now infamous web site and his 20 or so philosophical statements about six sigma. The logical consequence of Dr. Harry's fundamental contribution to  human progression to perfection is that six sigma will find its end-state in a full-blown eshatology ... there are already web sites out there that demonstrate how six sigma can be used to improve the strength of your faith (these poor chaps are still part of generation one six sigima, wait until they catch up with generation three six sigma. And can you imagine the kind of defect free, waste free and value added mega churches that the generation four six sigma will create ...).

OK Doc, please expound upon the Deming methodology and structured approach to improving an organization and it's processes.  Besides the platitudes and generalities of the 14 Points, PDCA and other Deming pronouncements please describe exactly what an organization should do to "follow Deming".  Thanks.  Reminds me of what my grandfather used to say to my Dad, "Stop losing money!!!" to which Dad replied, "How?" to which Pop said, "That's for you to figure out."   Gee, with all the attention Deming got in the 80's shouldn't somebody have figured out what "follow Deming" means?  Sure there is a lot of crap surrounding LSS but then again, there is alot of structure and format as well.  If you continue to read some of the really stupid posts that show up on this site, you will easily conclude that it isn't the LSS methodology that fails an organization, it is the idiots and hacks failing to properly apply and deploy the methodology.

... and what would that "properly (...) deploy the methodology" be, Dr.Darth? ... the prescriptions by Snee, Hoerl, Harry, Eckes, Bleyfoegel, Pydzek or any of the now myriad of consulting firms out there? ... not that I disagree with you on the fact that Six Sigma added the deployment dimension, but that was s.th. that interestingly only surfaced after Quality "failed" when it was re-introduced to the US in the 1980s. The Japanese are still quite happy with their now outdated quality circles as are the Germans. Maybe it's a little more complicated than the application of a simplistic psychological attribution theory that assumes that a "foolproof" blueprint of six sigma deployment has not been understood and therefore not been properly implemented by people with an IQ of less than 60. ...

Perhaps one of the reasons for six sigma failures is that 50% of the people deploying it are below average intelligence.

If this upsets you, it's a sign you are one of them.

IQ: Huh otherwise you are defying the law of average!

Good observation IQ !

Six Sigma seems to put management at the top of a pyramid.

Toyota Lean is the reverse it puts workers at the top of the pyramid.

I don't know what USA Lean teaches - you'll have to find out for yourself.

When some arrogant, ignorant people read my post they will become very rude, particularly that guy in India, so to save you some effort and confusion, I'll give you a quote.

"Kitano said that management should not be at the top of the proverbial pyramid. Rather, he suggested that the pyramid be turned upside down so that the managers - himself included - serve as a support for the workers."

All you need to do now is to find out who is Kitano :-)

Good luck!

Though people will disagree I think both are same there might difference in philosophies, tools , process improment, variation reduction but both are same essence " a methodology to solve a problem or methadology to reduce variation or many more definitions"

They are both are organized common sense but unfortunately common sense is not so common.

regards

joe

If you really don't understand it then you probably don't know enough to comment on it.  Lean is a name that Womack put on the Toyota Production System (TPS) - TPS is heavily based on PDCA . . .

If you have any interest in really understanding lean, read Pascal Dennis' (former manager at Toyota) Getting the Right Things Done  on the use of PDCA in the planning cycles at Toyota -- and how the PDCA follows into the work areas.  His book does a pretty good job at laying it out, esp. concerning your questions on what to do--  http://www.lean.org/Bookstore/ProductDetails.cfm?SelectedProductID=156  "

Or Steven Spears HBR papers (e.g., Learning to Lead at Toyota or, Decoding the DNA . . ) provides much better information on TPS than most of the early Womack stuff:  http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/hbrsa/en/search/saSearchResults.jhtml;jsessionid=E2HUKJSC00NKMAKRGWDR5VQBKE0YIISW?Ntt=spears&N=0&Ntk=hbrsa&Ntx=mode%2Bmatchallpartial&x=16&y=5

Shingeo Shingo, who worked on the development of TPS, provided his two cents on PDCA many years ago in his book on Continuous Improvement (Non-Stock Production)-- although he provides his comments on why PDCA needed further development -- “As Deming’s plan-do-check cycle demonstrates, the control function of management is missing in Western Management philosophies.  Management functions must encompass plan, control, and check; the do function lies beyond the control function, and it is precisely in this process of control and do that many production problems arise.  The lack of awareness of the control function is a major defect in production management in Europe and the United States.”

You probably are right about "the idiots and hacks failing to properly apply and deploy the methodology" though.

Simply put.  Lean is a method / system for removing slop/waste from  processes and optimizing material flow. Implementations are usually organized around product families.  During a Lean implementation, focused opportunities to improve work elements are identified (i.e., set-up time reduction). Six Sigma provides the tools to quantify and direct focused improvements.  Does it get any simpler than that?

Ken Stone

303-953-2862

Dont like the mail header (Lean vs. Six Sigma)- it's like Lean and Six Sigma are enemies or rivals.

They're not - they compliment each other - as long as you are able to cut through all the nonsense of trying to distinguish between them......

many debate whether a certain tool is Six Sigma or whether it is Lean or whether it is TQM.

Who cares? Does the tool/method make a difference? - if it does - we should use it without trying to categorise it.

Let's Change the title:

Six Sigma / Lean / TQM Allstars vs Customer dis-satisfaction

Only an opinion!

Davy T

Dear All,

can anyone clarify me the difference between VSM & lean

Lean is the Concept of Everything less i.e, Less inventory,Less Process time,Less Resources,Less WIP etc.

Different type of tools are being used for achieving this.

Some of them are SMED(Single minute exchange of dies) for less process time,Puke-yuke to less defects,etc.

But VSM(value stream mapping) is for less Inventory & Process time which is a part of Lean.

With Thanks

Santosh

Lean isn't about having "less" of everything. It is about removing waste. Having less inventory just for the sake of having less inventory, may not satisfy the customer's needs and therefore solves nothing.

Value Stream Mapping is the technique to identify areas of waste in your current state and to help in the conception of a future state map. Again, it used to identify areas that really matter and to focus on them.

The concept of lean being a toolbox where we can reach in and pull something out when needed is the wrong approach in my opinion. These methods work together in synergy. Toyota didn't get where they were today by only using some of them. These were methods they used to manage their business on a daily basis.

Wayne Marhelski

Hi Vidhya,

Lean helps you cut waste and six sigma helps your cut variation....Vikas

love it, such a shame that BS was not understood, what a waste, glad you think that TQM/Deming had it in one, i see the other two systems 6S and LE as an extension or rather a reduction and segmentation of what was achieved in the 50's. nice to see what are moving forward!! NOT

And I might add with a lot less rigor and practical direction. TQM was big on philosophy and short on "how to"

Sounds like you have some Shingijutsu background....

I found a book- The Complete Idiots Guide to Lean Six Sigma (found used on ebay for about $13 plus shipping).  It says, paraphrased, that lean is about reducing waste and six sigma is about reducing variation.  The authors say they complement one another and overlap- if you do one, to some degree you influence the other in the good direction.  Wish I could do more than quote a book, but I'm new at this and don't have much training. 

I am (trying to) do both at an aircraft maintenance base.  I guess we are categorized as low flow (average 14 days turnaround) and high mix (every aircraft comes in a little or a lot different from the others).  If anyone has input regarding the first stages of implementation (how-to) in this environment, I'd sure like to hear it.

Thanks everyone for the posts, you have helped me understand this better.  Have a great day.

Once again, I have no real insight.

 

However, you have to respect a post with legs.  The longevity is impressive.  Posts from 2002, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08.

 

Stevo

Agreed - especially when the title of the post is a grammarical nightmare.

Not only longevity, but a who’s who of posters:

 

• Marlon Brando
• Six Sigma Shooter
• QualityColorado
• Stevo
• Mike Carnell
• Dog Sxxt
• Stan
• Andy U
• mikel harry
• gomezadams
• Darth
• EdG
• Paul Gibbons
• Brit

 

Stevo

No Kidding, the one surprising guy that didn't post was Billy Bob.

Anyone heard from that redneck lately?

I think I may know what happened to him.....

A few years ago the DOT experimented with Black Boxes (similar to Flight Recorders) in 3/4 ton, 4 wheel drive pickup trucks. They then studied fatal crashes. In over 80% of the fatal crashes the final words of the driver were "Oh SHXX!"

Except in parts of Texas, Mississippi, Alabama & Kentucky. There in over 55% of the fatal crashes the driver's last words were "Hold my beer & watch this!"

Rest in peace....Billy Bob.

Hi Erik,

Read the details that you have provided...I am planning to do a project. However, unable to understand what factors decide whether the project is a Lean project or a SS project.

Please guide if there is some study material on it or you can explain it in a layman's language.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Jaspreet