Who could tell me 5 or 10 key points why 6 sigma is better than TQM?
The “versus” and “which is better” discussion is moot.
try conducting a search of the forum for the many discussions on this topic. You’ll find that it’s not about which is better, but rather how we can use both in conjunction with other methodologies to improve our processes.
IMHO, it’s a dead horse.
OK. it is not about which one is better?
But, What is the dfference of management philosophy between 6 sigma & TQM? TQM also used the most same of tools in 6sigma, such as SPC/control chart, DOE, Mapping, MSA, team work & PDCA against DMAIC. Just Motolora or GE created a new name?
please use the search engine to find germane discussion threads…they are there, I promise!
First, I agree with Heebeegeebee (sorry about the spelling). You are asking someone to hand you an analysis that if you were truely interested you could, and should, generate it yourself. It doesn’t matter if it is for a “which is best analysis” or whatever your motivation. There is a question in your mind and you need to resolve it to your satisfaction.
Second you need to understand it isn’t about tools. Just as an FYI – MSA was not part of TQM. It actually was something that wandered in during the Allied deployment. We used it extensively at Motorola depending on which group you were dealing with. If you look at Mario Perez-Wilson’s first book “Machine Process Capability” you will find it in there because we used it on the FMU-139 program he uses as a model for his book “Six Sigma.” If you do a search around one particular early guru’s writting you will see it is very distinctly missing. It came in through the consultants who actually had to fix something rather than pontificate on some esoteric BS. The difference between a practitioner (or as he refers to us “mechanics”) and a philosopher. Actually in January 1997 there was a rather heated meeting at the guru’s ranch over our deliver of MSA in GE. So you need to get a clear picture in your mind what each is. If you are counting you are dealing with 3 distinct things by this point – minimum.
There is a clear difference in the methodologies. It is obvious to a practioner. If you aren’t you will struggle with the difference. BTW the comment about slapping on a different name smacks so badly of ignorance you will find at that point most people will dismiss you as irrelevant.
The other complication is “what is Six Sigma?” The version we took into Allied and GE was not what would be presented if you asked for the Motorola U version as far back as 1998. That was a major issue when we were selling to NEC in 1998. Motorola U was quoting a price on the “Six Steps to Six Sigma” when we were quoting on dMAIC. They wanted Allied and GE programs but wanted to compare price to the Motorola six step program. Perhaps a little oportunistic when you compare programs with distinctly different costs for the supplier. You can see the confusion in this discussion group very frequently. When we merged Six Sigma International with Marshal Qualtec to form Six Sigma Qualtec in 1998 we selected Bruce Hayes as President. He came from Motorola U and the dMAIC was a different system than he was aware of. There is a point where the Six Sigma the world knows diverges with the Motorola story. The goal was the same the path was different. You need keep the programs straight if you want to make a comparison. Compare content (content not bing defined as a list of tools) not names. This is the opposite of the norm. The names were not switched to protect the innocent – they were kept the same to confuse the superficial.
There are many differences between 6 sigms and TQM:
1. 6 sigma: Business result oriented
TQM: Quality process oriented
2. 6 sigma: executive ownership
TQM: the person(s)involved ownership
3. 6 sigma: Focused statistics knowledge training and application
TQM: No mass training in statistics
4. 6 sigma: cross-function
TQM: only one function
5. 6 sigma: to focus on reducing the variation
TQM: to emphasize under control
The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.