iSixSigma

Schuette

Forum Replies Created

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 257 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #189700

    Schuette
    Participant

    Darth,

    I’m not sure what you are complaining about – it looks just like you.

    0
    #189327

    Schuette
    Participant

    I work in manufacturing and we are actually constantly reducing costs in all departments; however we do not waste our time thinking about who is no longer needed if we shorten our cycle times and the ovarall amount of work.  Instead we concentrate on what additional value-added work we can now do that we didn’t have the available resources to tackle before. The ultimate goal of the cost reduction should be “do more with the same number of people.”  This will demonstrate measureable performance improvement and increased efficiency such as jobs per hour, or cost per job.

    0
    #189257

    Schuette
    Participant

    I know Darth, and he is no Butler.More of a French Maid……

    0
    #185932

    Schuette
    Participant

    Tina – United Health has a six Sigma program, so why don’t you start there?  UH is a large company, so I bet they have a mentor program – if your boss isn’t any help, how about a mentor.  Also standard in large companies is a “Women at UH….” group.  Sine you are a woman, have you reached out to your women in business group at work?
    Since you said that you received a call asking if you were thinking of leaving, your company obviously has internal mechanisms for employee retention.  I’d make sure you have exhausted all internal options – certainly with all of the Heathcare change coming, I am sure that UH would rather have you working on improving their systems using SS – you just need to find the right door in your current company.  Plus, you have the added baggage of owning a house that is most likely underwater, making it harder to find a job with relo that can get you out of that house – best if you can get into the SS program at UH.

    0
    #62480

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hoping this is still available months later.  I’d be interested in seeing your documentation as well.
     
    Please send to [email protected].
     
    Thanks!
     
    jim

    0
    #185730

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanks for your feedback.  To make sure I am clear about our products, I will expand on the description more.
    For example, one product line may make only 10 units.  Some product lines make up to 70 units per shift.  However, each product or unit contains many parts (up to 100 parts per unit, some units take more parts – these are refrigeration cooling systems / units). 
    For calculating the DPMO, is it best to say each unit has a total of 100 opportunities (each part installed in a unit equals one failure opportunity as a whole) or should all the opportunities for failure for each part be rollled up for the calculation (i.e., 100 parts in a unit with 10 opportunities for failure each = 1000 opportunities for failure in the unit built)?

    0
    #62445

    Schuette
    Participant

    This is helpful, thanks.  Are there other measures (with benchmarks) you would recommend for calculating the cost benefit of improving flow through an ED?  I imagine I may be able to put some conservative estimates around the portion of patients who leave without being seen and the amount of overtime required to staff these situations, but I wonder if there’s anything more commonly measured in these cases.

    0
    #62420

    Schuette
    Participant

    I’m just entering the healthcare field and would love to see this. If you could forward details to [email protected] I’d very much appreciate it.Thanks in advance.
    jim

    0
    #184173

    Schuette
    Participant

    Roland:
    Your 8 1/2 by 11 form sounds very interesting and usable. Would you please e-mail a copy? Our company is really hurting and our original Idea Box concept is an abysmal failure. I’m trying to pump some life in it before it is too late. Thanks.

    0
    #182386

    Schuette
    Participant

    Neil,
    Of course you are correct about data under the curve.  I meant to and should have said data within specifications.
    You are also correct when you say this is a one sided measurement.
    However, a 6 sixma defect rate is 6 sixma either side of the mean.  That is the only way a 3.4 dpm falure rate (after the bogus 1.5 sigma shift) can be obtained.
    If six sigma is 3 sigma either side of the mean, then a process with a 1350 dpm failure rate is a 6 sigma process.
    Please refer to Implementing Six Sigma Smarter Solutions Using Statistical Methods, Chapter 1.
    Best regards,
    Jim

    0
    #182160

    Schuette
    Participant

    CT,
    By todays thinking your are correct, Six Sigma refers to the method rather than a numeric goal.  The idea today is to improve the product/process until it is no longer cost effective to make further improvements.  The goal is the bottom line.
    However, originally the six sigma goal was to obtain a failure rate <= 6 sigma around a mean and within the customer specification.  That failure rate was deemed to be 3.4 dpm (with the bogus 1.5 sigma shift).  An actual 6 sigma failure rate is 2 ppb.
    As stated earlier, todays goal is improving the bottom line, not obtaining some magic numeric goal.
    Regards,
    Jim

    0
    #182145

    Schuette
    Participant

    Neil,
    Six sigma is 6 standard deviations either side of the mean.
    99.9999998% of your data is under the curve.
    Jim

    0
    #181261

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hi Obiwan,
    How are you? If you don’t mind me asking; are you still with BOA? How Six Sigma Program and Quality & Productivity groups are doing now at BOA?
    Best Wishes,
    Jim

     

    0
    #177332

    Schuette
    Participant

    you have to be a teacher.

    0
    #177018

    Schuette
    Participant

    The idea of passing all suggestions thru a panel or lead person is good.  That’s what my company does.  All suggestions no matter how small or trivial or how large and complex are turned into a suggestion program.
    There it is evaluated as to whether it is accepted as legitimate, and what category it fits into 6-Sigma, Lean, or Just Do-It (JDI).  This is usually done within a day or two (and mght involve talking to the suggestor).
    After it has been categorized, it’s then prioritized against the other items in the same category.  JDI’s are the simpliest to implement – they can be assigned to someone immediately (not always the suggestor).
    6-Sigma and Lean issues often need scheduling because of man-power and necesaary data collection and reporting.  These are treated as small internal projects.
    All of these issues are tracked for progress and whether the outcome improvement is a hard, soft, or a combination improvement.
    Recognition is given to suggestors and implementor for all the categories – so that suggestor doen’t concentrate on just the big issues.  We found earlier that not recognizing the JDI suggestors and implementors resulted in a decrease of these ideas.  Recognition is important – no matter how trivial the suggestion appears.  The recognition is for thoughtfulness, not level of skill or knowledge.
    Computers:  We have found that leaving the computers “ON” saves a tremendous amount on boot-down and boot-up time each day.  PC’ are simply left ON with the screen locked – many programs can be left open – some programs are recommended to be closed.  It’s already been determined that we are spending a few more $ to leave the PC’s on overnight.  But, productivity increases has outwieghed the extra cost of the electrictiy.  We found that booting up in the morning and booting down at the end of the day cost us an average 11 lost minutes of productivity per day per PC.  This was down through a Lean study and very well documented.  We also found that the frustration level of our workers was much lower in the first hour of working because they weren’t triddling the thumbs wating for the PC’s to boot up whiel they had customers on the phone.
    Our current evaluation system was actually the result of a suggestion put inot our old suggestion pprogram as an improvement.  It was categorized as a Lean item to improve the flow of evaluating, categorizing, ranking, implementation, and recognition of suggestions.  All suggerstions are tracked on our intranet site – which all employees have access to; and a bulletin board in our lobby lists the status of all projects being worked on; along with the recognition awards given to the participants – interesdting enough we inlcude our customers and suppliers in this program, and they also appear on the board which becomes a tool itself when one supplier sees their competitor  coming up with more improvement ideas then themselves.
    Customers give us exceleent ideas and postive feedback on the projects from their perspective which we call “Eye of the Customer.”  We’ve modified the “Voice of the Customer” concept to “Eye of the Customer” to represent the feedback from the customer as to what they truly “see” as improvements in our operation.  All positive feedbacks from customers are documented and discussed in our monthly department information meetings.
    Jim

    0
    #174089

    Schuette
    Participant

    Great – thanks Darth.

    0
    #174085

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanjs for this – Unfortunately I dont have the book but need to be able to do the test fairly quickly.  Could you possibly give me an abbreviated version please?
    cheers
    Jim

    0
    #172978

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanks any way Stanly. We are sorry that you feel that way about all of us. We will not be able to benefit from your knowledge. However, if we can assist you with a project need, just ask.
    Jim
     

    0
    #59354

    Schuette
    Participant

    Give me a call at 614-735-3058 to discuss.

    0
    #171348

    Schuette
    Participant

    Measurement Systems Analysis. Try to eliminate or minimize operator influence in the measurement result. Run the same units across both measurement units (I used 5 units run 3 times each across two stations; I feel this is a minimum requirement, 10 units is preferred). Use the two measurement systems as separate operator inputs. Analyze the data’s reproducibility to determine any differences between the systems.
    I’ve done this a number of times with good results; I hope I’ve explained it adequately.

    0
    #170053

    Schuette
    Participant

    My thanks to both of you.  I did notice some significant outliers that, when removed, bring the F-Test and Levene’s Test results much more in line with each other. 

    0
    #169463

    Schuette
    Participant

    Marion,
    I’ve been in your shoes before.  Often Management wants to produce more in less time with the same or less people – but they don’t want to spend any money in doing so – this seems to be their definition of Lean.
    For the last 7 years, I’ve been working with many electronics companies in Japan (Sony, Fujitsu, etc.) spending about half my time in Japan and the other half here in the US.  I do not see the situation described by others (even in the plants producing automotive products).  These companies allow there lean teams to define their workspace for efficiency and “adequate” space – what I see is often more open space in the workcell than in the comparible US competitor.  The operators are also given the tools they identify they need – as long as they increase throughput and decrease scrap.  They combine Lean, Kaizen, 6S, etc all into a team effort.  Most of these Japanese companies are working 24/7 with scheduled down time for planned maintenance.  As long as the team commits to meeting the production schedule – management supports all suggestions from the team to improve yield and efficiency.  They seem to have adequate breaks.  One big difference I’ve expereienced is they have “cadence music” – the beat of the music controls your work.  I’ve caught myself working to the cadence – it’s quite catchy and makes very well engineered – it’s not a constant cadence – it starts off slow then speeds up slowly to a pre-determined pace, then begins to slow down just before break.
    Jim

    0
    #164625

    Schuette
    Participant

    greg
    thanks for direction. this was exactly what I was looking for. 

    0
    #164594

    Schuette
    Participant

    I searched high and low on every video archive available.  Hope someone may know of what I am speaking of.

    0
    #64887

    Schuette
    Participant

    The sun goes round the earth. Simple, obvious and wrong. To benchmark software process productivity divide the software size by the development effort. Simple, obvious and (unfortunately) wrong.How do we understand the earth goes round the sun? Collect data and analyze. How do we understand and set up realistic benchmark measures of software process productivity? Interestingly there are two ways:1. Common sense (it really is obvious and not rocket science)
    2. Collect data and analyze to put numbers on the common sense, that’s the rocket scienceCheck out the paper “Software Benchmarking: Common Sense and Rocket Science” on the SEI web site.

    0
    #157069

    Schuette
    Participant

    Okay, now we have the same numbers. I thought I messed up or something with the numbers you provided the first time.

    0
    #157060

    Schuette
    Participant

    That’s the key: 20 males voted negative.
    Now what are the answers? I came up with different answers. Can you provide the calculations, so that I can see how you came up with 30, 0, 50

    0
    #157025

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanks for your reply. The tentative answer is yes we want to improve but we want to know are 1.improve on what?
    2. what are benefits;
    3. what are the processes, time, resources and cost involved?We need to know all these before we can make a decision.Jim

    0
    #155382

    Schuette
    Participant

    TQM is about quality regardless of cost, Six Sigma is about quality to reduce cost.  These two philosophies could not be more opposed initially but complementary when applied in sequence.  Deming said shut down the line if poor quality is discovered – cost (sometimes emense cost).  Six Sigma gets you to a spot where you can quantify cost savings with the inference that quality will also result.  Kinda counter intuitive.  GE has had success with six sigma because they had quality and wished to see if they could maintain that level of quality in a more ‘lean’ environment.  Simpler and fewer processes are easier to accomplish with a quality result.  In my opinion, TQM first to acheive quality and Six Sigma next to maintain and streamline the processes that produce a quality product and reduce cost.  TQM is the rigor Six Sigma the application of lean and cost reduction to an already rigorous process.

    0
    #154169

    Schuette
    Participant

    Agree with TPS putting flowing requirments into all sub operationss to insure the final product meets the needs.
    Does anyone have data on “out of the box” quality?
    When installed – no defects or parts replaced?
    6 months later – defect rate or parts replaced?
    And concept of process and infrastructure to improve.  We have R&D designing equpment, a transition team ensuring manufacturability, mfg engineering etc. to build it rigth and a field engineering organization to install and trouble shot product in the field.
    Think of a complex MRI machine, X-ray machine or production.
    What is the expectations, benchmark, for these types of equipment…

    0
    #152411

    Schuette
    Participant

    Basscially the jig concept consists of a bottom plate, a middle plate where the 16 parts are placed and a top plate. The assembly is then put in a press that compresses the parts together under pressure and temperature. The press has 3 bays. One of the jig would potential puncture the parts at the same time as being pressed. 1 factor 2 levels, 1 factor 3 levels for full DOE total 6 experiments for no replicates, 16 parts made per run in any case. How would you go about this? My problem is to understand and estimate the risk of being wrong depending of the number of samples measured and number of trials to be carried out to assess for a certain risk what I need to do. This is to verify the design before it gets scaled up.
    1. Test one bay only. Assume all bays the same. Total run 2, 1 run for each jig. Depending of the number of samples measured how confident can I be that the results obtained are indeed good and representative of the 16, or maybe better to ask what is the risk of being wrong if I measure say 8 samples out of the 16, for each of the 2 jigs?
    2. Evaluate with the 3 bays. Run full DOE. What is the risk of being wrong if I measure say 8/16 samples for each run. I believe that increase the number of samples tested would decrease the stdev by sqrt of n but how does that translate in risk?
    Any help or direction would be appreciated. Many thanks.
    Jim

    0
    #152405

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hello Jim and many thanks for your useful comments.
    My problem though is that I have 2 new designed jigs (each can press 16 parts at the same time) and the press has 3 bays and need to validate them and especially be able to come up with a risk that they won’t work before scale up can be started. How would you go about it from the start? I should have defined my problem from the start!
    I have the possibility of doing 1 trial for each jig and need to come up with a risk depending of the number of samples tested from the 16 parts from each trial. If I test 8, 10, 12, 14, 16. Here I suppose the risk is based on “repeatability” instead of reproducibility of the jig. At the end there will be no confidence in the jig being reproducible because the jig will be tested only once for now and no confidence in using a different bay of the press. For the repeatability by measuring say 8 out of the 16 samples what is the risk that all parts don’t conform to the specification?
    Many thanks
    Jim

    0
    #152395

    Schuette
    Participant

    Good point. I didn’t prove they are independent.
    I assumed they would be independent based on the fact that the pressure applied on each part for different thicknesses was pretty consistent within the jig and therefore made the assumption that for a variability in the thicknesses of the parts, it wouldn’t affect the other parts.
    Jim

    0
    #152390

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hello Jim,
    Answer 2. 16 parts in parallel. The jig can accommodate 16 discrete parts which are pressed at the same time. The 16 parts are independant from each other.
    By measuring 16/16 or only 14, 12, 10, 8 etc… parts what would be the risk of being wrong compared to target specifications. Shall I evaluate the power using a double sided test of hypothese on the mean with an unknown variance (assuming a normal distribution)? Say target thickness is 200 microns and spec are +/- 50microns.
    Jim

    0
    #152374

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hello BTDT and many thanks for your answer.
    I have read a bit regarding the power of a test as you suggested and would need a bit of clarification. Below detailed what I understand. Please correct me if I said anything not right.
    Say I want to assess that the thicknesses produced on the 16 parts made with the jig 1 are compliant to specifications (say target 200 microns +/- 50 microns). I should consider the null hypothesis that the parts made are compliant (what I want) and evaluate the risk of being wrong beta based on the number of samples tested out of a maximum of 16. I should want beta to be as little as possible less than 0.20 so that power is greater than 0.80. How would I proceed next to calculate the power (the chance that the mean obtained doesn’t deviate from Ho hypothesis) depending of the number of the parts’ thickness measured?
    So for 15 parts measured what would be the chance that the thickness average deviates more than 50 microns? What about 10, 8, 6?
    Any comments or links to relevant information would be greatly appreciated.
    Many thanks
    Jim
     
     

    0
    #151998

    Schuette
    Participant

    Neither!  Though prior to downloading the article I was asked for some profiling questions!  Hmmmm……….. you may be on to something, Hebe

    0
    #151991

    Schuette
    Participant
    #150401

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanks!

    0
    #150393

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thanks for the quick response. Appreciated your input!
    Jim

    0
    #150390

    Schuette
    Participant

    D and QC,
    How do you stand (facts) concerning Six Sigma? Are you for it/against it/Indifferent? And have you invented or innovated something in place of it? Also, if you were writing such an article what would it include, can you give an example or two? Looking forward to your input!
    Jim 

    0
    #58976

    Schuette
    Participant

    I would contact Mike Nichols who used to work at American Express. He is the incoming ASQ President but he knows alot of financial companies doing Six Sigma.

    0
    #58962

    Schuette
    Participant

    I lead a reengineering effort at Bank One now JPMorgan Chase within their corporate finance division. We primarily leveraged lean concepts with some six tools to reduce closing monthly books quicker and more accurately (to name one). I can be reached at [email protected] should you want to chat offline.
     

    0
    #149217

    Schuette
    Participant

    Here’s a thought … rather than taking the opinions of a bunch of anonymous anybodies like us, why not write a short note to a few of the world’s leaders in quality.
    Dr Wheeler should be first on the list:
    [email protected]
    Any additions to the list ?

    0
    #148727

    Schuette
    Participant
    #58919

    Schuette
    Participant

    One way to start is to analyze your VRU/IVR and observe how your customers perceive the complexity of your VRU/IVR. How many layers of options do you have? How many options within each layer? Customers are not intentionally irrate. Most strong emotions in a transactional context develop as a result of the reactions to a frustrating situations. How easy does your system make it to investigate the information the customer is looking for. And if the customer decides he/she wants to speak to a live person even if you make it presumably easy for them, then that’s the cost of doing business. In no instance have I seen that a business can “forcefit” a system back to its customer and sustain long-term growth. .

    0
    #146375

    Schuette
    Participant

    A great way to mislead beginners.
    Wasn’t 3.4 DPMO supposed to be dead and buried ? 
    When will all you idiots wake up ?

    0
    #57103

    Schuette
    Participant

    Georffe,
    I find your comment about SS and LS not being “problem solving methodologies” quite remarkable.
    The etymological origin of “problem” is “problema” = Greek for “gap”, a word that in its origin means the valley in-between two mountains. “Methodology” originates from “methodos” = path, and logos = “logein” (to collect … originally berries and mushrooms), then transformed into “katalegein” (enumeration of events in Homer’s poems), and then transformed into “logos” as a systematic way to solve intellectual problems in philosophy (see the Pre-Socratians).  In its very original meanings then “methodological problem solving” meant finding a way in-between two mountains (typically the shortest and least dangerous path) to cross the mountaineous areas in Greece.
    The whole idea behind DMAIC, as far as I have understood it, is to define a problem (performance gap) and solve it, i.e. close the performance gap (expressed as a metric) through a “structured methodology” (5 steps, specified tools etc.). The “Define” stage was introduced to ensure that the “right” problem was being solved.
    From that angle, I find it quite interesting that six sigma methodology is NOT a problem solving methodology. 

    0
    #146353

    Schuette
    Participant

    Rather than just winge, why not take legal action ?
    You have been conned by experts. You’d have no trouble with a class action.

    0
    #146298

    Schuette
    Participant

    A correction there Sammy. It didn’t work at Motorola either. Read Andy U’s posts.  All they did was a change of name to SS on what they were already doing; then they sacked 60,000 people.

    0
    #146272

    Schuette
    Participant

    Sammytexas will tell you how.

    0
    #146271

    Schuette
    Participant

    Wonderful to see someone being honest. 
    I’m sure this is the tip of the iceberg – and the Titanic is sinking !

    0
    #146170

    Schuette
    Participant

    Absolutely NOT !!  Despite what many half witted SS consultants will tell you.

    0
    #143134

    Schuette
    Participant

    ANY ONE?
     

    0
    #142388

    Schuette
    Participant

    My suggestion would be to have a VP of six sigma who reports to the CEO. Have the CEO state the burning platform for change to kick things off.

    0
    #141192

    Schuette
    Participant

    Just looking for updates after 4 years of trying. At this point I do not believe that anything including education will work in public education. I have now tried very low key talking with 3 school boards. As soon as there is the slightest hint of problem definition, all turn into defensive screamers who place their hands over their ears yelling “we can’t hear you” This is crazy but it is no wonder that the US public education system is ranked 20th  in the world. I may have just bumped into board members who all have kids in the respective schools and look like their only objective is to get the best for their kids. I am pretty successful in other areas even with “life and death surgeons” who develop good solutions to preventing operating on the wrong organs, but these schools have stopped me cold. Has anyone else tried any improvement methods with public schools and lived to tell about it?

    0
    #139371

    Schuette
    Participant

    Trishcler’s booklet – ASQ Press – is a good read on defining and understanding value / non-value add

    0
    #138880

    Schuette
    Participant

    Manu – You want to know the sample size necessary to show that there is an acceptable amount of variation – if you have no variation you just have an incapable measurement system.
    You need to specify what amount of variation you need to be able to detect, and the power you want to assign the test.  Plug the numbers into Minitab or other program, and you will get your sample size recommendation.

    0
    #137771

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hi G
    can you share the dashboard prepared by you without numbers, im right now trying to create metrics to evaluate our clerks from a call center.
    My email id is [email protected]
    Jim

    0
    #137753

    Schuette
    Participant

    deepan,
    I’m curious – what skill set did you tell the nulti-national company you were bringing as a consultant to get this job if you are asking for tools and cookbooks here?  What did you bring to the table – it had to be a very persuasive presentation.

    0
    #136967

    Schuette
    Participant

    Please add me to the mailing list. Thanks

    0
    #136841

    Schuette
    Participant

    I have see a lean simulation specifically for the financial services sector.  Similiar to a wooden car assembly simulation, it simulates check processing from receipt to cash letter clearing to fed  using wooden (eg. proof encoding, sorter, low speed sorter).  Also can be used for lockbox, a/p, payroll, etc.  He can be reached at [email protected]

    0
    #136513

    Schuette
    Participant

    if p-value is less than .05 then your factor is significant.
    jimmm

    0
    #133526

    Schuette
    Participant

    Which class is this for, and is it graduate or undergrad level? 

    0
    #132943

    Schuette
    Participant

    Umm, Mike and Dr. S – Stan said 4.5, not 4-5.
    Clearly he was taking into account the 1.5 shift, so rather than the standard 6 +/- 1.5, Stan is incouraging her to be Lean by using the optomistic side of the 1.5 shift.

    0
    #132408

    Schuette
    Participant

    Like everything else in Vegas – depends on what you want done.

    0
    #131899

    Schuette
    Participant

    What is you’re email, address I will send you some good refresher stuff.
    God Bless

    0
    #131164

    Schuette
    Participant

    So……… it can be anywhere in the world?  I know this place outside of Barcelona.

    0
    #131134

    Schuette
    Participant

    Most certifications have the name of the company/institute that awarded it.  You could check with that company for validity and then check to see if the company itself is offering a ligit certification. 

    0
    #130731

    Schuette
    Participant

    Art,I’m trying to research Six Sigma for implementation in New York schools. Do you know of any Six Sigma education consultants near New York City? I was wondering if you could contact me at [email protected] with your contact info?Best,
    Jim

    0
    #64108

    Schuette
    Participant

    During an evaluatation and investigation phase in a project concerning VOIP as a replacement for traditional PBX systems I utilized a survey to gather data about real needs or wants from the customer.  The survey gave them options of the areas described in using a Kano model.  Expected, Desired, Exciter, No Value at anyprice.  Use this weighting to decide what the user is willing to pay for or what low hanging fruit you can resolve with the VOC.  There are examples of Kano and how to use it on ISixSigma.   Hope this helps in deciding how to please the customer.

    0
    #128540

    Schuette
    Participant

    V,
    If you want it to be a Lean process, you shouldn’t balance out your demand by making chocolate ahead of time – that is inventory, one of the deadly wastes.  Your demand is seasonal, so try and make the process more efficient during the high demand periods. Use all of the Lean tools to fully understand the process and make it as efficient as you can. 
    After you have the process as efficient as you can ecconomically make it, then look at alternative solutions to your unbalance demand.  Instead of laying off workers, can sales and marketing come up with new products or customers for the excess capacity during the slow months?

    0
    #125580

    Schuette
    Participant

    Bump

    0
    #125372

    Schuette
    Participant

    Matrix Of Change

    0
    #124082

    Schuette
    Participant

    Thank you all for your helps.
    They are indeed very valuable, which I cannot find them elsewhere.

    0
    #124021

    Schuette
    Participant

    But is it possible to differentiate GE from Motorola, in term of methodology or tools they use?

    0
    #123082

    Schuette
    Participant

    Ken,
    The purpose of measuring your takt time is to right-size your process, so first you have to correctly define your process(s).  You can’t say this is “extra” from their real job, or you do not have a planned process.  What you mean to say (I think) is that this is an intermittent process.  If you want to also accommodate “hot” requests much quicker, you need two takt times – one for regular requests, where the customer is OK with 35 days (verify with VOC! – don’t assume!), and one for 2 day requests.  Determine the respective quantities of those two processes within your 400 requests per year.
    Next, determine how your demand actually comes in – I would guess that you do not get an even number of requests each day.  You probably get requests that follow budget , quarters, beginning of year plans, etc.  You need to have a realistic understanding of the actual demand before you can do takt time right.  If you size your process using averages and simple division, you will have not have a lean process.
    And finally, what do you want to do about the “real” work?  Will you push it to overtime, or let deadlines on that work slide until the course work is done, than catch up?  You need to allocate how much of the available time you will allocate to course work.  Will you work on the courses every day with all people, or one person dedicated to each course request?
    The takt time math is very simple, but the production planning for your multiple products is not.  You have more work to do on your planning before you calculate takt time.  Any takt time calculated before you do the above work is wrong, because you have not defined the required inputs yet.

    0
    #60568

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hmmm, the BB in your name must stand for something besides Black Belt.To start – who are your customers?  Identify all internal/external customers first.

    0
    #121401

    Schuette
    Participant

    Hmmm, the BB in your name must stand for something besides Black Belt.
    To start – who are your customers?  Identify all internal/external customers first.

    0
    #120610

    Schuette
    Participant

    CK, not sure I understand the question but if your project involves improving on the time required to close the books at the end of some period, then this is an “improvement” project that would benefit from (at least)….
    process maps – current and proposed states
    SIPOC
    FEMA modified for use in a service environment
    XmR
    Capability
    Pareto
    Control charting in the Control phase where a missed cut off time is defined as a defect
    Hope this helps
     
     
     

    0
    #58469

    Schuette
    Participant

    Check the link to the left NEW TO SIX SIGMA. A few books specific to six sigma in the financial services industry are out there as well.  Check the link in the upper right.

    0
    #120238

    Schuette
    Participant

    In order to answer your question I would have to ask why you are measuring the customer service call process?  There are two basic reasons for doing that.
    1.  To show your process is in control
    2.  To change your process by reducing the number of service calls thus reducing cost and improving customer satisfaction.
    If  your measurements are meant to drive down customer service calls at what level would you claim complete success (100, 10, 0)?  If your goal is lower than what manufacturing is currently injecting into the system then your measurements will generate action in the manufacturing process because to reach your goal they must change their output.   
    The bottom line is your goals, your control limits, and your measurments should be set to drive change in manufacturing’s behavior.  If you set your control limits at their current control limits will that drive change in the manufacturing process and thus the number of customer service calls?  Only you can answer that!

    0
    #119080

    Schuette
    Participant

    No – hope this helps.

    0
    #58447

    Schuette
    Participant

    Having some success in a P&C Insurance environment getting management to think in terms of “defects”, etc.  Gaining acceptance on the use of process behavior/control charts and the idea of common cause variation, etc.  Have done a couple of significant/”fully blown” DMAIC projects with significant results in terms of cycle time.  Used a t test a while ago to make a point on the difference in processing times for one of our offices.  Was pretty effiective in terms of getting people to listen.  The limits to date spring more from the lack of  data and not having had a “measurement mindset” for the past few years.  Does this help?

    0
    #118805

    Schuette
    Participant

    Check out some insight via the thread below.
    http://finance.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=923
    Good Luck
     
     

    0
    #118324

    Schuette
    Participant

    This is not an online stats class.  Please reference your 9th grade stats book.
     

    0
    #117918

    Schuette
    Participant

    You want to know how well you can captur the variation in your fill operation across your specification range.Make up 10 samples that cover the span of your +/- specification, using pours from granuated beaker in your lab, or whatever way to have to get the amounts close (you are measuring R&R, not accuracy).The next step depends on whether you have actual manual operators, or if this is an automated measurement.

    0
    #117373

    Schuette
    Participant

    NS,
    I disagree – you calibrate for a range of flows and pressures, and that’s it.  How are you going to R&R an in-line flowmeter and discount pump flucuations, viscosity changes, etc.  You would have no idea what the actual velocity and pressure is vs the flow meter error.  You can an idea of the total variation of pressure and flow rate as you set the pump to different flow rates and pressures, but you can’t isolate the meter results. You are dependent on how consistent the pump is.  If you do it as a destructive R&R, you are assuming the flow is constant, which I don’t believe would be a good assumption.  Which is pump fluctuation, and which is meter flux?
    Walk me through an example of how you would do a R&R on an inline flow meter and get any meaningful data on the meter.  I’m interested.

    0
    #117354

    Schuette
    Participant

    You don’t do an MSA on flow meters – you calibrate them to a known standard.  They should have come with calibration documentation when they were purchased/installed, along with recommended recalibration intervals.  You should have replacements, so that you can pull one and replace it with a fresh calibrated unit while the pulled one is recalibrated.  If you don’t have the equipment, find a contract service that will do it.

    0
    #116296

    Schuette
    Participant

    Down doggy,down!  Didn’t you read the question? He was asking about the control chart and how it relates to good and bad parts – which it doesn’t (in control).  You responded by saying “switch to 2-sigma limits”.  What does that have to do with good/bad parts doggy? He wants to show his operators how he can sample production and still keep bad parts from getting to the customer – that requires knowledge of the specification doggy.

    0
    #116283

    Schuette
    Participant

    Yo Dog – aren’t you confusing spec limits with control limits?  Why would you say switch to 2-sigma limits, when he hasn’t given any statement regarding current capability?  He may already be at 6-sigma.

    0
    #116243

    Schuette
    Participant

    Farhad said:
    >People realise its not other people who are screwing up, its poor processes.
    No, it’s people screwing up. The processes  themselves might suck too, but that’s also a result of people screwing up.
     
    >Working on cross functional teams promotes co-operation and bonding.
    This is a load of tree-hugging hippie crap, the remnants of “est!” from the 70’s.
     
    >When people finally sit down to work together on a problem then its about the issue…not the people…. thats a huge cultural shift.
    Too bad SS isn’t about working on the problem, it’s about working on the SS processes. Unfortunately this doesn’t make the problem go away, it just results in more busy work for those organizations that buy-in to SS.
     
    >My experience is completly contrary.
    Maybe you’re just gullible and susceptable to lip service?
     

    0
    #116152

    Schuette
    Participant

    Terri,
    We run a Sales Greenbelt that lasts 4 days.  We’ve had very good projects come out of that, including a Black Belt that increased revenue $11MM/year through productivity increases, allowing the sales people to call on more customers with greatest potential.  I don’t believe you need anything specific to Sales – what you need is training targeted to what is important to your sales needs.  You don’t need to train your people in DOE, or hypothesis testing, or even regression.  You need (I think, based on my own experience) good customer definition, real VOC, AHP, QFD, MSA, and some dashboard building for your control charts.  Sales isn’t that complicated, but it also usually not controlled very well – that’s your challenge in my opinion.  Find someone to give you the basic blocking & tackling.

    0
    #115497

    Schuette
    Participant

    I remember a good DOE on the composition of silly putty. It may have been from one of the statistics software firms. Perhaps someone with a better memory can help.

    0
    #115054

    Schuette
    Participant

    I know you have “new” in your name, but jeez, did you try typing “call center forum” into Google? Lots of forums came back, along with white papers, free Call Center magazines, etc.
    And I thought it was just my kids……………..

    0
    #114426

    Schuette
    Participant

    It looks like you are trying to do to much, and combining your apples and oranges.  Things knid of fall apart after you calculate sigma measure.
    The gage study does not require tolerances, unless you want to report % of Tolerance.  The gage study is supposed to use parts that represent the total variation within the process.  You use the sigma variation in the parts to obtain the process variation, not a Cpk calculation.  The Sqrt (process variation**2 + measure variation**2) gives you the total variation. 

    0
    #114160

    Schuette
    Participant

    When you do a job search in large databases like Monster, use keywords like “continuous improvement”, “process improvement”, “process excellence”, or “quality”.  Then read the text of the job description, looking for requests for Six Sigma knowledge, exposure, training, etc.
     

    0
    #114141

    Schuette
    Participant

    Ray – I ran the gage department for a plant with 11 CMM’s.  We ran GRR on every CMM – the first time about 50% of the inspection programs failed, due to probe at wrong angle, wrong probe ball size, poor fixturing, etc.  Using two operators is fine – make sure they take each part out of the fixture and replace each time.
    In addition to the GRR, we also ran precision checks, where we ran the same program 10 times without removing from the fixture.  This gave us a good indication of the real precision of the measurement. 
    In production or part prove-out, whenever we had a very tight tolerance, we would run the measurement several times and take the average.

    0
    #114101

    Schuette
    Participant

    Sales revenue/salesman, customers/salesman, new customers/salesman, product penetration/salesman – in short, what metric does the business want to drive, and how does that metric flow down to the salesman level. You get what you measure.  Figure out what you want to get, and then measure it.

    0
    #112640

    Schuette
    Participant

    “If p is LOW, Ho must GO!  If p is HIGH, Ho’s your guy!”
    Works everytime!
     

    0
    #111644

    Schuette
    Participant

    Gary, I don’t think you can get what you want, because if you have a binomial process at 3.4dpm, you will never see a defect if you are manually checking them.  Your best solution is to put some effort into changing it to a variable measure.  What are you measuring specifically?  There is usually a way to change a measurement from descrete to continuous – even if it is just for process estimation. 
    If you are measuring presence/absense, then poka-yoke it to prove you can make zero defects.
    What are you trying to measure?

    0
Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 257 total)