iSixSigma

BB

Forum Replies Created

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 154 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #174458

    BB
    Participant

    Hi
    What is the logic of the 1.41 factor in arriving at the no.of distinct categories ?
    BB
     

    0
    #59296

    BB
    Participant

    Hi Adam
    Could you also email it to me at [email protected]
    Many thanks
    BB

    0
    #169641

    BB
    Participant

    Cummins does

    0
    #158831

    BB
    Participant

    Thanks Rob
    In BB class we were taught to use excel to code the table and then calculate the Average high and low, effect and coefficient to get the prediction equation.
    Is this not the same thing as just setting up your design in Minitab using coded values. If so, if I have 4 factors with different levels, i.e. Temp & Time with two levels (-1,+1) and Depth & Speed with three levels (-1,0,+1) and enter these as coded levels in Minitab will it recognise the 0 and interprete it properly?

    0
    #158804

    BB
    Participant

    Thankyou,
    In this model how would this affect how calculate the Y average High & Low i.e. how do I treat the 0’s? Do I bother about them?
    Also is it truely always advisable to use coding in DOE’s?

    0
    #152825

    BB
    Participant

    What???  No mention of Don Wheeler???  Are we converting you Steve???

    0
    #152823

    BB
    Participant

    There is no such thing as perfectly normal data.  You will never know precisely your data’s distribution.  Shewhart developed control charts without any assumption of data distribution.  Note that Shewhart did not rely on the Central Limit Theorem.
    Histograms also do not require any assumption of data distribution.

    0
    #152822

    BB
    Participant

    Charting for charting’s sake is a waste of time.  What is the problem you are trying to solve ?

    0
    #152036

    BB
    Participant

    Hi Harry ,
         Could you please explain further : Why when n > 15  , we can forget the use of 3 sigma limits for sub-groups of the control chart. I want to learn.
    Thanks ,
    BB

    0
    #150768

    BB
    Participant

    It wouldn’t.
    Six sigma has enough nonsense of it’s own without adding to it.

    0
    #150719

    BB
    Participant

    If it was 800mg in 800g of product, that would be a concentration of 1000 ppm.
    It’s not hard to see why I’m a black belt is it ?

    0
    #150064

    BB
    Participant

    Darth is correct.  Advantages is not relevant.  Perhaps the only “disadvantage” is that you need to ensure that your data follows the assumptions of each of the associated distributions.  If not, use an XmR chart.  Although less sensitive, it does not assume a particular distribution (there are many fallacies around this, largely propagated by authors such as Montgomery).

    0
    #150062

    BB
    Participant

    Six sigma has been given a bad name by all the crap associated with it.
    Continuous improvement in the true sense as used by Toyota, is far more useful.

    0
    #150039

    BB
    Participant

    Nice to see that no one has fallen into the error of claiming that control charts depend on the central limits theorem.

    0
    #150038

    BB
    Participant

    Read pages 16 to 32 “Normality and the Process Behaviour Chart” for a fascinating analysis of the Quincunx. Surprisingly, the distribution of balls is not binomial  !!!

    0
    #149258

    BB
    Participant

    stan baby…
    i’m sure u’v made it very clear (as an adult) for someone who is “NEW” at this!!!
    man… u’r so matured…!!!
    OK…I shall make it even more simple…just for u:
    ” If u’r estimated part to part variation, estimated @ 99.73% Confidence Level viz. nothing but u’r 6sigma lies within u’r customer or process specific tolerance i.e. Specification Limits i.e below the USL or above LSL (basically within the boundary) and also if u’r 6 sigma = 50% of the Tolerance, then u can treat me b’cos u’r process has achieved 6sigma!!”
    textless formula…again just for u:
    6sigma = 50% (USL-LSL)
    sigma = R-bar/d2
    R-bar= Average of ranges collected over 24 time blocks with 3 or 5 readings in every timeblock
    d2= constant (depends on sample size = 3, 5 etc /time block)
    Zusl = (USL – overall avg) / 3sigma
    Zlsl = (overall avg – LSL)/3 sigma
    Cpk = (Zusl/3, Zlsl/3)
    simple isn’t it….?!! 
     

    0
    #149159

    BB
    Participant

    Man…. u rock!!
    Naima… pc of advice: Pls do contact u’r faculty from where u got the BB certification.  

    0
    #149141

    BB
    Participant

    hi JB,
    U r close enough!…” If u’r 6 sigma limits are below USL & above LSL then process is capable or defect free (in simple words)”  but most importantly if u’r 6 sigma limits = 50% of u’r tolerance limits then u’r process is 6sigma capable.
    …easy isn’t it!
    bye
     
     

    0
    #148829

    BB
    Participant

    Darth claims:  ‘All is revealed in his online book entitled “Mysteries of Six Sigma”.  “
    Where are you Darth ?  Is Stan correct ?

    0
    #148824

    BB
    Participant

    Darth,
    Could you please share with us how this book answers these basic questions.

    0
    #148810

    BB
    Participant

    I should have also asked:
    5. Do the constraints apply to Harry’s 1.5 “drift” as well as Harry’s 1.5 “correction” and Reigle’s “dynamic” 1.5 ?

    0
    #148809

    BB
    Participant

    RE: “Dr. Harry has put severe constraints around his derivation of the 1.46 shift and has never assumed it to be a constant as it is often used.”

    What are the constraints ?
    How are the constraint levels calculated ?
    What is the derivation or proof of these constraint levels ?
    Do you have a link to the proof of the constraint levels ?

    0
    #148773

    BB
    Participant

    To Everyone Who shared their expertise , knowledge  and advice to my querry Thank You Very Much !
    Regards ,
    BB

    0
    #147525

    BB
    Participant

    Reigle,
    This is clearly fraud. 
    Where is that lawyer ?
    You have obviously read Wheeler and you understand the point he is making.  Wheeler makes the point that process averages may shift by any amount. Shifts are not in any way “limited” to 1.5.  Points out of control can fall anywhere.
    You have also suggested that the 1.5 is a “correction”, not a “shift”. Make up your mind.  Conning people can be tricky can’t it ?

    0
    #147524

    BB
    Participant

    Spoon – Reigle,
    We get your message – you have defrauded lots of companies. 
    No wonder Motorola had to sack 60,000 and lost market share.  No wonder GE customer satisfaction dropped and GE turned to outsourcing 70% of manufacturing.

    0
    #147482

    BB
    Participant

    Pyzdek’s article is a farce.  He pulls 1.5 out of the air without any justification whatsoever.  He still calls it a “shift” instead of a “correction”.
    If the 1.5 were really a shift it would mean that every process in America was out of statistical control at least 13-14% of the time.  With the idiots that are running six sigma programs, such a distasterous situation is becoming increasingly likely.
    My personal view is that the 1.5 is part of a Japanese plot to destroy American industry.

    0
    #147465

    BB
    Participant

    QualityColorado,
    Wake up sleeping beauty.  Nobody here believes that 1.5 crap.  Even Harry changed his tune on the 1.5 shift about 4 years ago.

    0
    #147464

    BB
    Participant

    Matthew,
    When you know that someone like Harry has made false statements in order to make more money do you:
    1. FEEL it is fraud
    2. KNOW it is fraud
    ???

    0
    #147456

    BB
    Participant

    Yes, it’s far better to have processes screwed up by idiots who have done a 2 week SS course, than statisticians.

    0
    #147426

    BB
    Participant

    He probably read that crap about increasing sales by 20-40% and was stupid enough to believe it.  I wonder how many other sales people have been conned ?
    I’d love to see Harry on a DOE project with a group of used car salesmen … or earth moving equipement salesmen … they would bury him.

    0
    #147229

    BB
    Participant

    Can’t anybody explain to this poor fellow what Harry’s accomplishments are supposed to be ?  Frankly I can’t think of any right now … maybe if I wait for a million years …

    0
    #147209

    BB
    Participant

    Rather than appearing a fraudster like Harry, perhaps you can give us a link to these “studies” ????? 
    Your statement “4Sigma-products can  cause 15-20% of sales  revenue” is meaningless.  What are you trying to say ?

    0
    #147208

    BB
    Participant

    Lebowski,
    A simple example might help those new to SPC.
    My target is 10cm +/-0.02  giving specs of :
    USL = 10.02 cm
    LSL = 9.98 cm
    My process runs with a variance indicated by :
    UCL = 10.01 cm
    LCL = 9.99 cm
    Mean = 10.0 cm
    My process is on target.  Reducing variance will bring control limits closer to the mean.
     

    0
    #147194

    BB
    Participant

    “Six Sigma has never implicitly said we were trying to achieve target and the way we still teach SPC (yes even Wheeler) reflects that.”
    Stan, this is correct but in fact the situation is much worse.  Six Sigma is fundamentally a specification based methodology.  The very idea of 3.4 DEFECTS relates to the specification, not the target.
    Six Sigma has much nonsense; probably some fraud including the 15-20% sales loss at Cp=1.33 ; but worse of all, its fundamentals are wrong.  Good quality can only mean on target with minimum variance.

    0
    #147114

    BB
    Participant

    “Maybe, you can suggest something more constructive about the shift in the process mean. “
    Aren’t you the nut case who claims “because of the 1.5 shift all processes are out of control 13-14% of the time ”  ?
    At least you don’t seem to be fraudulent, just stupid.

    0
    #146873

    BB
    Participant

     Detroit News Sept 2006:
    10,000 black belts and they still made a mess of it ! :
    “Shortly after Ford Motor Co. recruited quality expert Kathi Hanley away from Toyota Motor Corp. late last year, she was handed an important assignment.
    Ford asked her to take a hard look at a new crossover it was developing called the Ford Edge. Trained on the vaunted Toyota quality system, Hanley pored over the Edge and found more than 70 significant issues and hundreds of minor concerns.
    Her frank assessment, laid out in a detailed memo, helped set in motion an intense effort by Ford to bring the Edge up to world-class quality and still launch it on time this fall — never easy with an all-new vehicle.”

    0
    #146871

    BB
    Participant

    Don’t people here ever learn ?  How many times does this have to be explained ?  Are you all sheep ?
    There is no 1.5. 
    No wonder so many SS companies are in trouble.

    0
    #146824

    BB
    Participant

    Andy,
    I think we posted almost simultaneously.  Interesting to see we have similar conclusions.

    0
    #146823

    BB
    Participant

    DPMO,
    Wonderful to see that you are one of the small band of thinkers.  My apologies for getting a bit excited but I get very frustrated with the masses that follow Harry and Reigle’s nonsense so blindly.
    I can also understand you being a slave to management’s addiction to numbers.  If they must have a measure as a number, why not use MSD ?  This does have a good basis in Taguchi.
    Better still of course is to start on the long path to education – or perhaps I should say re-education.

    0
    #146817

    BB
    Participant

    You guys just don’t get it do you.  Let me spell it out  DPMO CALCULATIONS ARE MEANINGLESS. They are a total waste of time.  How many posts does it take to get this across ?
    You can also forget about 1.5 drifts, 3.4 DPMO, six sigma tables, Zshifts.  It is all crap invented by Harry and Reigle to get you to buy their snake oil.
    Do some searches on the forum here:
    a) 15,000% error in DPMO – Burr
    b) 3,200 data points needed for PPM at 2.95 sigma; 6,000 data points needed at 3.16 sigma
    c) volumes on the nonsense of the 1.5 assumption in six sigma tables
    Do not use DMPO calcs
     
     

    0
    #146800

    BB
    Participant

    This is really pathetic.The best any human can do is one error in 1000 ops. How on earth do you think you’re going to get 3.4 per 1000000?

    0
    #146670

    BB
    Participant

    The situation is worse than you might think.  Your table is for a single error.  An insurance form may have 20 fields and many more characters.  Even your post has 500 characters giving a 40% chance of an error.
    The message is, forget about six sigma and PPM error rates in service industries.

    0
    #146629

    BB
    Participant

    Create a Burr distribution with:
    c=4.873717
    k=6.157568
    You will find that this is distribution has :
    mean = 0.00
    sigma = 1.00
    skewness = 0.00
    kutoisis = 3.00
    In other words, exactly the same as a normal distribution. It is impossible to tell whether a Burr or normal will fit any data set.  However they have a difference of 15,000 % at six sigma !  In practise we can never know what the real distribution is for any date set. Hence:
    DPMO and PPM calculations are meaningless.

    0
    #146615

    BB
    Participant

    This looks very much like Reigle’s pseudo scientific nonsence.
    He’s trying to impress you with the fact that he looked up the formula for a normal distribution … typical Reigle.
    His first major error is that your data distribution needs to be perfectly normal for this equation to apply.  Even if your data does happen to pass a test for normality, you can still get errors in ppm calculations up to 15,000% !!!

    0
    #146595

    BB
    Participant

    Do NOT use DPMO calculations.
    There are dozens of posts here that describe how these calculations are meaningless. 

    The +/-1.5 shift/correction does not exist
    The calculation only applies to ideal distributions
    The inaccuracy in the DPMO result is up to 15,000 % even for data that tests as being normal.
     

    0
    #146592

    BB
    Participant

    You are wrong.
    Motorola won the Baldridge award using TQM, or at least their version of TQM.  Six sigma was a name change and a marketing exercise. 
    Mikel Harry fluffed it out with a whole lot of rubbish.  Reigle added his verbal spew.  The Instituite put a ridiculous price on it.  And a whole lot of dummies like you bought the snake oil  !

    0
    #145413

    BB
    Participant

    BS In = BS Out

    0
    #145361

    BB
    Participant

    You are wrong.  Six Sigma has a lot more than one blank mind … so if it comes to IQ, SS is leaner than lean.

    0
    #145315

    BB
    Participant

    Are you crazy … 2+2 = 6
    … just ask Harry !!!

    0
    #145244

    BB
    Participant

    Both focus mainly on BS

    0
    #143349

    BB
    Participant

    In a word … NO. 
    Don’t waste your money.

    0
    #142728

    BB
    Participant

    Hi,
    How do you rate BMG’s BB traing and cert.Which are the top BB certs?

    0
    #141355

    BB
    Participant

    BTDT ,
     
              If I combined all the DPMO that goes outside the two specs. limit how will I calculate the Sigma value ?
    Thanks

    0
    #60964

    BB
    Participant

    Dear Brit,
    Thanks for your time and appreciate your advice. Actually, I am based in Canada. Unfortuantely, I don’t see many openings here in Pharma and/or healthcare sector. Infact very limited opportunity as Six Sigma/ Process Improvement career.
     Do you have any recommendations on MBB training provider, as mentioned earlier, it’s not being paid by the company and I will have to shell out from my own pocket. Hence I am looking for a reputed, reliable source at a reasonable cost.
    Thanks
    BB

    0
    #138821

    BB
    Participant

    A common statistical term, “Treatments”, originated in the agricultural sector (certain crops or fields were “treated” with fertilizers for comparisons to a control).
    I work in a potato processing company that has been doing 6-Sigma for 3 years now.

    0
    #137182

    BB
    Participant

    Hi Twocents,
    I just emailed you again.  Please reply when you get a chance.
    Thanks.
     
    To all who have contributed to this post.:
    Thank you for all the comments and suggestions.  My time has come to decide whether to accept the offer or not.  BB

    0
    #136402

    BB
    Participant

    Hi Twocents,
    I have one last email for you.
    Thanks
    BB

    0
    #136401

    BB
    Participant

    Hi Twocents,
     
    I have just emailed you. 
    Thank you.
    BB

    0
    #136394

    BB
    Participant

    Thank you everyone for the comments and advices. 
    Hi Twocents, Will you please provide a email where you can be reached?  If not, it is ok as well. 
     
    Thank you.
    BB

    0
    #136377

    BB
    Participant

    Thanks Everyone for the advise.  I ll give it a try if I get the job.
    Thanks again 
     
    BB

    0
    #136364

    BB
    Participant

    Hi E,
     
    No, I have not.  The consulting firm I am interviewing for is strictly for the pharma industry.  I am researching whether this is a worthwhile career to go into.
    Thanks.
    BB
     
    BB

    0
    #136338

    BB
    Participant

    Thanks for the reply,
    Can anyone provide some more advise on the career outlook after being a consultant?
     
    Thank you.
     
    BB

    0
    #135504

    BB
    Participant

    Hello Paul,
    Would appreciate if you could send me the word document too.
    My e-mail id is [email protected]
    Thanks, Krithish

    0
    #134927

    BB
    Participant

    I would also likea copy of your checklist, please send it to [email protected]

    0
    #133001

    BB
    Participant

    ((1.96 95CI X 10 Sigma) / 3 E)**2 = 42.68 sample size
    BB

    0
    #132452

    BB
    Participant

    I disagree in relation to control charts. Depends on whether you are using minitab, and logical grouping. Otherwise you can get incorrect inforajiton about whether your process is in control or not. usual sample size rules apply (Central Limit Theorem) for all hypothesis tests. I have seen people use very small sample sizes and therefore the power of the test is dramatically reduced. If it is costly to collect the data then dont forget you can do a prediction on what power or confidence level you are happy with for the data results and then minitab can you tell you what sample size you need. (remember do you have attribute or variables data.).

    0
    #132451

    BB
    Participant

    Did you see this on their website?
    Process Sigma Calculator Assumptions
    Understanding The Basic And Advanced ModesThe Basic Mode of the Sigma Calculator automatically adds a 1.5 Sigma shift to the process Sigma value that is calculated. Why is this done? It’s done because it is the “standard” way that Sigma is reported (note: this may be different in your company, but it is done in this manner by Motorola, GE and many other companies). By doing so, the calculator result assumes that you are providing long-term data and it is providing short-term Sigma. The 1.5 Sigma shift is based on the assumption that over time, and with a sufficiently large number of samples, a realistic Sigma value is 1.5 Sigma less than that calculated to show the success of your project (i.e. that shown in this calculator and in reports to your company).
    If you want to calculate the process Sigma using data other than long-term, you should switch to the Advanced Mode where you can change the process Sigma shift value from 1.5 to whatever you feel is appropriate.
    Here are a couple of examples to help illustrate the calculations. A long-term 93% yield (e.g. 100 opportunities, 7 defects) equates to a process Sigma long-term value of 1.48 (with no Sigma shift) or a process Sigma short-term value of 2.98 (with a 1.5 Sigma shift). A long-term 99.7% yield (e.g. 1,000 opportunities, 3 defects) equates to a process Sigma long-term value of 2.75 (with no Sigma shift) or a process Sigma short-term value of 4.25 (with the 1.5 sigma shift).
    Final Thought: When we talk about a Six Sigma process, we are referring to the process short-term (now). When we talk about DPMO of the process, we are referring to long-term (the future). We refer to 3.4 defects per million opportunities as our goal. This means that we will have a 6 sigma process now in order to have in the future (with the correction of 1.5) a 4.5 sigma process — which produces 3.4 defects per million opportunities.
    Notice: Sigma with a capital “S” is used above to denote the process Sigma, which is different than the typical statistical reference to sigma with a small “s” which denotes the standard deviation.
    Understanding The FormulaDefects Per Million Opportunities (DPMO) = ((Total Defects) / (Total Opportunities)) * 1,000,000Defects (%) = ((Total Defects) / (Total Opportunities)) * 100Yield (%) = 100 – (Defects Percentage)process Sigma = NORMSINV(1-((Total Defects) / (Total Opportunities))) + 1.5

    0
    #126041

    BB
    Participant

    Time is a metric not a unit of measure. You would never measure time as 1.2 time or 1.345 time. It would be 10.2 mins or 1136 secs etc.. It is a continuous data.

    0
    #126037

    BB
    Participant

    DELL computers certifies people at 3 levels: Yellow, Green & Black. They are planning to start another level (Brown) between Green & Black. The annual savings from projects in DELL amount to around $2.2Billion (hard, soft & avoidence).

    0
    #126036

    BB
    Participant

    depends on what’s the unit of measure you are using. i would consider time, if measured in seconds or hours, as a continuous data for all practical purposes.
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #124691

    BB
    Participant

    There are many organizations that offer Six Sigma certifications like ASQ, ISSSP, QCI etc.. You need to finish 2-3 BB projects and then clear a certification exam. Most of these certifications lapse after a certain period, which means you would need to go for a Recertification.

    0
    #121596

    BB
    Participant

    what does six sigma evolve into over the next 7 years????

    0
    #121593

    BB
    Participant

    Peppe,
    Yes we schedule weekly project reviews to identify bottlenecks and track progress to date but apart from seeing him at these formal meetings he randomly visits us throughout the week to see how we are going. He also censors alot of the external conversations regarding six sigma which we feel is important to us, we hear about it second hand – poor communication and power play on his behalf.
    Yes, he is new to Six Sigma – not formal training yet!!!, he obviously knows the basics and alot about project management but his job encompasses 6 sigma & daily production performance with time spent on six sigma matters of low priority to him. Daily production is more important – like fighting fires!!!!
    However, luck is with us, a new manager between us & him is coming. Less mind games and more dedication to the six sigma cause.
    thankyou all for your thoughts.
    BB

    0
    #121505

    BB
    Participant

    Yes, we term him a Corporate Psychopath.
    following link has details of this personality!!!!!
    http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1360571.htm
    5 May 2005 Is your boss manipulative? Intimidating? Totally lacking in remorse? Yet superficially charming? Then you could be working with a workplace psychopath. The latest figures suggest one in ten managers are psychopaths, and this week Catalyst goes deep inside their minds – what makes them tick, how do you spot them; and how do you avoid being crushed by them. We’ll also run a handy test – tune in to find out if your boss is an office psychopath.

    0
    #120469

    BB
    Participant

    You can try [email protected]
    Have heard they provide decent training.
    Hope this helps.

    0
    #58428

    BB
    Participant

    Repost.

    0
    #112810

    BB
    Participant

    All these messages are full of the Xmas spririt, but none as responded to the original question.
    Could someone please help on the main issue?
    Best regards
     
     

    0
    #101311

    BB
    Participant

    “In the Frame / Out of the Frame” can be helpful.  Also SIPOC map (Supplier, Input, Process, Output, Customer) can help to narrow focus – defines the process you are going to look at.

    0
    #97425

    BB
    Participant

    hi,
    i think you can give a good example of one guy shooting a dart at a dart board and he takes three chances. then the other guy takes three chances with the same darts, same distance and on the same board. take upto 5 guys.
    show them how they can reproduce and repeat the results and how far (may be distance in mm) each time they can vary within oneself and among themselves.
    i hope this helps. any way i liked your question.
    BB

    0
    #97419

    BB
    Participant

    I took that exam this time and I have been certified.
    Take that exam seriously as it is tough. My green belt exam under GE was full of theory questions and so it was pretty easy, some numericals were also easy and concept based. Infact GE gives good training but their exam is easy.
    ASQ exam was really a fight (4 hours and 150 questions) atleast 30% numericals and it went fast. Study DOE ,Hypothesis testing, Analysis of Variance (for DOE), Variable charts throughly. Most of the questions are from this area.
    Books: I would suggest
    1st and foremost the QCI guide.(only for the theory part…don’t depend on it for numericals)
     2nd and very important Breyfogle. (theory part ..specially DOE and industrial applications part)
    3rd Probability and Statistics for Engineers by Levine, Ramsey (very good book for numericals)
    ASQ has designed its BOK in such a way that it covers almost everything. Their exam is such that not everyone can pass through…it really tests your knowledge…so be careful and be prepared.
    good luck
    BB

    0
    #97092

    BB
    Participant

    Try Smallpeice (sic) in Leamington. 01926-336423

    0
    #94391

    BB
    Participant

    Anyone who thinks that 6 Sigma does not apply to them has probably not taken the time to see how it applies to them.
    At our company, every department was expected to comply, and was measured on their results. What gets measured gets done around here. It is amazing to see how areas that didn’t believe that 6 Sigma could be applied to their work are now showing significant benefits and are believers of 6 Sigma.
    A few ideas for you:
    – Some member of the managment chain of this group will be a “driver” personality. Show that person facts and data of how others are getting results and challenge him or her to do better. Driver personalities hate being in last place.
    – Planning departments should have access to metrics, budgets, goals, etc. They should be the best group for sponsoring strategic projects across the company. I highly recommend the book “Strategic Six Sigma: Best Practices from the Executive Suite” by Dick Smith and Jerry Blakeslee with Richard Koonce. I talks about how to integrate 6 Sigma with balanced scorecard type objectives to make 6 Sigma the driver of change.
    Don’t give up on this group. Usually those who are unwilling to accept what appears to them to be a fad, turn out to be your best advocates once they see the value.

    0
    #94086

    BB
    Participant

    I went thru training with people from 2 steel casting foundries and 1 person from a cold drawn steel shop. I myself am in the machining business with about 80% of our product is steel. Caterpillar has sent people thru training from their steel foundry that pours engine blocks.
    BB

    0
    #91119

    BB
    Participant

    See https://www.isixsigma.com/offsite.asp?A=Fr&Url=http://cio-asia.com/pcio.nsf/unidlookup/BBECDE7C051D623448256DB3003CF129?OpenDocument
    “I’ll give you an example. Say our server resides in the U.S., and the response time in Asia is very poor. The first response everyone has is, It’s a bandwidth problem. That’s very expensive to deal with. But we went and measured—we looked at several servers around the world and measured how fast their response times were. We found variability in response time in servers that had nothing to do with bandwidth. We were able to do a kind of tune-up that brought the response time way down. We didn’t buy bandwidth or software; it didn’t cost me anything. That was not the conclusion anyone thought of up front, but by doing the measurement and analysis phase, we found the root problem. ” –Mark A. Brewer, senior vice president and [U.S.-based] CIO of computer manufacturer Seagate Technology

    0
    #89876

    BB
    Participant

    I’d balk at the large sample size and prefer to use a smaller sample size with a single replicate, unless there is very small variation in the shelf life variable at different factor levels. While not wanting to sound miserly in choosing a smaller sample size, I’d prefer to confound the factors I thought could be done so- this reduces my overall cost of the experiment and also lets me understand whether my factors were chosen right. All this is just off the top of my head. Would like to know what others think

    0
    #89094

    BB
    Participant

    How many black belt projects have you done? Cost reduction isn’t the only driving factor in six sigma projects. When TQM was introduced to our management team x number of years ago we thought it was a waste of time. It was to slow and not comprehensive enough to react to real issues. It was forced on us by a group of weak minded idiots that did not work for a living. They thought they always knew the real story but did not, looks like nothing has changed. Those tools did not work then and they do not work now. I hope my company is competing with yours. Six Sigma does work in the hands of someone that knows what there doing and the biggest roadblocks that derail success are quality improvement experts such as yourself that never look outside of the vacuum they live in. 

    0
    #88079

    BB
    Participant

    Gabriel,
    I noticed after I sent my last post that I missed your point entirely… Sorry! I was concerned about Bob’s final comment: “It may not be a deliberate lie but it is still not true.” I hope he doesn’t discount all of 6 Sigma over this one issue. Our MBB’s avoid this issue in training if they can help it, but inevitably, someone picks up on it and confuses the group.
    I agree with you that it is confusing. I think that “short term DPMO” and “long term DPMO” would be better metrics than “Sigma” and “Sigma Quality Levels”. But 6 Sigma sounds so much cooler than “3.4 DPMO in the Long Run.”
    I agree with Stan’s latest post that focusing on improvement is more important than saying “my process is at a 4.21 Sigma Level.” But Stan, don’t lose your patience with the 6 Sigma newbies posting questions to this site. That’s what it’s here for. If we can’t convince the newbie on this site that 6 Sigma is a good deal, what happens when we get a newbie for a boss who wants to get rid of 6 Sigma? Or a boss who reads this site and is convinced that “It may not be a deliberate lie but it is still not true”?

    0
    #88069

    BB
    Participant

    Gabriel,
    Thanks for your post. I understand the confusion that Bob is having better now.
    4.5 Sigma means 6.8 DPMO. If I experience a 1.5 sigma drift over the long term, my performance will get worse. The number of defects will increase to 1,350 DPMO, which is approximately 3.2 Sigma.
    Motorola decided instead of calling this performance 4.5 Sigma based on the short-term observation of 6.8 DPMO, they would call this performance a 3.2 Sigma Quality Level to indicate long term expected results of 1,350 DPMO. Thus, they invented a new measurement system called “Sigma Quality Level” that has been confusing people ever since. “Sigma” and “Sigma Quality Level” are two different measures and cannot be used interchangably. They do not mean the same thing. Because just about everyone uses Sigma Quality Level, we often get lazy and report this as “Sigma”, but it is not the same thing.
    What I think Bob and Gabriel are so upset about is that 4.5 Sigma and 6 Sigma Quality Level have approximately the same number of defects. This makes it look like we are wrongly improving our Sigma score by 1.5! Back to our previous example, by using a Sigma Quality Level, our “sigma” score went down, not up.
    When you try to compare Sigma to Sigma Quality Level it is like comparing inches and centimeters. You can’t say that centimeters are wrong because 6 centimeters is really only 2.5 inches. They are different measures.
    Where people can go wrong is if they measure the short term performance as 3.4 DPMO and claim “6 Sigma” status.   3.4 DPMO assumes a 1.5 shift over the long run. If you see 3.4 DPMO in the short term, Motorola says you can expect approximately 1,350 DPMO over the long run, which is a 4.5 Sigma Quality Level. You have to use the right measure for the right thing.
    The 6 Sigma “program” has declared that all processes can expect a 1.5 sigma drift over time, and that we all should use Sigma Quality Level as the measure. While many have and will continue to debate the wisdom of this, it is the measurement system of the 6 Sigma program. You can try to fight it, but it is what it is. As part of a 6 Sigma program, you’ve got to use it. Just use it responsibly: as a measure of long term performance.
    Hope that helps!

    0
    #88056

    BB
    Participant

    Have you ever taken out a loan Bob? The loan officer tells you that your rate is 5% and your very happy. Then you get a truth in lending statement showing a higher Annual Percentage Rate (APR).
    Did your loan officer lie to you? No, the APR is just another metric describing the same loan rate. Which is “right”? Neither. You just need to be aware of which rate you are using, and be aware of what it means.
    The nice people on this forum have been trying to educate you on what is well documented on this site: the commonly used sigma values are based on a long term view showing drift in the mean. Is it easy to understand or explain? No. Try explaining the difference between your loan rate and an APR rate. Is it wrong? No. You just need to learn the technical terminology and the technical reasons for “Sigma Quality Levels.”
    Don’t get so frustrated with this “wrinkle” in sigma reporting that you miss the point: short term process control does not equal long term process control. Our sigma targets must be adjusted to take this into account.

    0
    #87825

    BB
    Participant

    Our training starts with a one introduction class for all new employees then after several months of being on the job, we train them in the Six Sigma Fundamentals or Yellowbelt program.  We strive for 100% of our employees to have the yellowbelt training with a small project completed.
    A yellow belt curriculm should start with the basics-why the company is spending time on Six Sigma and why the employee should embrace this new initiative.  We spend several hours here, showing previous successes, discussing other companies successes and why it is different from other initiatives that had been introduced.  Six Sigma is a cultural change for most companies and how they will work going forward.
    Then spend time on what is Six Sigma, both as a program and the term itself.  Begin introducing basic statistics and how to apply them.  This is the most important part of a yellow belt-understanding what the statistics are showing, some people will not understand how to calculate them, that’s OK, you will have Greenbelts and Blackbelts to help them out.  Include basic charts, i.e. SPC, Run, Pareto, etc.
    Other topics to cover
    Begin introducing Six Sigma Basic Tools:  Project Charter, Problem Statements, Customer requirements, Process maps, Fishbone, C&E, FMEA and Control Plan.  Include a basic introduction of Lean tools, they can apply those very quickly in their work areas.  We have them actually work on a small problem in their work area and apply the tools in class with coaching from the trainers.
    Include a  module or two on team role, team-work and personalities.  Many have little or no experience working in a team environment and these modules will help them begin to understand the dynamics of team-work.
    You will be pleasantly surprised on how fast they catch on and begin thinking the Six Sigma way.  The Greenbelts and Blackbelts can train advanced tools as needed to team members and will also have to coach the basic tools to refresh memories of the yellowbelts, but they will have the basic background.  Often, you will have several people that really understand and become excited-future Greenbelts or Blackbelts!  Employees trained through yellow belt become MUCH better team members after the training.  Hope this helps-Good Luck!

    0
    #87711

    BB
    Participant

    Our corporation requires that ALL employees be trained in Six Sigma and the first level is the Yellow Belt or we call it Fundamentals.  All employees then have an understanding of the Six Sigma Process, an introduction to the basic tools, and an understanding of the basic statistics and what they mean.  This program then has all employees prepared for future teams and understanding what is expected out of them when asked to be on a team.  I have trained this class 6  times and each training session renews my faith in the excitement of new employees, that are ready and willing to make improvements in their work areas and ready to join teams that will help the company be successful.  Our training also includes a very small project that they work on during training and complete after that continues their training and shows them how Six Sigma is successful and that they can contribute to the company. 
    Yes, it does require someone to mentor the trainees and their projects but the reward is great-employees that have begun to “buy-in” to the Six Sigma Process.  Take time to make sure the training is interesting, worthwhile and well presented and then you have to make sure the projects are successful.  Employees will begin the road to believing in Six Sigma and will be ready and eager to join another team! 

    0
    #87616

    BB
    Participant

    I have never heard of the 1.5 sigma shift being applied to a confidence interval, only to the Sigma Quality Level or Cp or Cpk.
    Author George Eckes writes:

     “I don’t suggest that my clients use the long-term number because each situation is different. In some cases, where the process is not in statistical control, the shift may be worse than 1.5 sigma. In other cases, a 1.5 shift may not actually occur in your process, it may be less. My practical answer to this is for the project team to do a series of Cpk calculations so that their unique shift can be determined.” – from The Six Sigma Revolution

    0
    #87506

    BB
    Participant

    In my company we have separate projects that pertain to On Time Delivery, Warrentee Returns, and Credit Memo Reduction. In my opinoin you will have more success focusing on one defect at a time, don’t boil the Ocean.

    0
    #86666

    BB
    Participant

    Make sure you aren’t doing technology development during the course of a new product development program.  This can delay the product development process.  They should be separate with new product technology proven before a specific product is designed for the marketplace.

    0
    #85458

    BB
    Participant

    Absolutely it makes sense!  In fact, I’d argue that there is the potential for greater benefit in these processes than in the manufacturing plant.  If a manufacturing process was running at 100,000 PPM defective, there would be an awful lot of activity to reduce that, but there are many business processes I’ve run across that are at 100k or worse and it’s treated as just part of the normal process…

    0
    #85265

    BB
    Participant

    Yes, I think having good descriptors and standard categories is necessary in order for the searches to be very valuable especially with a large number of records.
    Also a good point is adding a new failure mode and solution to the problems to an FMEA and notifying those who use those same FMEA’s.  It would also be nice if we used Process Control Systems for our business processes and developed FMEA’s for those processes also.  Then we could use the same methodology, notify those using the same FMEA (or similar enough FMEA).
    BTW, anyone out there actually use Process Control Systems in their company?  I hear GE really uses them a lot.  There also known as Process Management Systems I believe.

    0
    #84177

    BB
    Participant

    Can anyone provide more information on Bank Of America’s Six Sigma initiative…. Do you believe they are in it for the long run ? Are certain segements of Bank Of America doing better Six Sigma implementation than others ? What type of salaries do they offer BBs and MBBs ?

    0
    #83597

    BB
    Participant

    I’ll take a shot at this since no one else has replied. Without more info. I’m assuming you mean short term sigma versus long term sigma; that is, z(short term) versus z(long term). And of course this involves the always conversation-stimulating topic of the 1.5 sigma shift ! If this isn’t what you want please supply some more particulars:
    z(short term) = z(long term) + 1.5
    z(long term) = z(short term) – 1.5
     

    0
    #83532

    BB
    Participant

    At GE we used six sigma to improve our recruiting processes, ID and correct retention issues and to outsource non-core activities (in and out of HR). Those are just a few examples…the biggest impact was the change in mindset, where HR people identified the key metrics for their function and measured their success based upon their ability to improve the results of those metrics.

    0
    #83479

    BB
    Participant
Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 154 total)