Martínez

Waste,
You might appreciate this comparison of the Shewhart / Deming / Wheeler approach vs Montgomery’s probability approach:
http://www.asq.org/pub/jqt/past/vol32_issue4/qtec-341.pdf
He favours Shewhart.

The con man Eric returns to throw some mud and try some name calling – the usual reactions of a man with his back to the wall.
Interesting how he still avoids answering the questions that reveal his lies.
Eric, you will find that your lies, deception and fraud are no way to win respect. 

Waste,
The “consumer’s risk” is the probability of accepting a bad lot.
The “producer’s risk” is the probability  of  rejecting  a good lot.
Shewhart charts are not probability charts and these terms do not apply to them.

I find it  fascinating to watch the reaction of con men like Eric Maass, when their lies are revealed – they run for cover !! 
Con men like Eric never dare engage in discussion with intelligent people.  They prey on the gullible.
 

The charts to which you are referring are known as “Power Function Curves”.  They are still the same today as they were “at that time” as you suggest.  They indicate the probability of detecting various shifts in the mean for various subgroup sizes and for various combinations of control chart detection rules. 
For Detection Rule 1, subgroup 5,…[Read more]

Exactly what do you mean by “60% beta risk for a 1.5 shift ” ?
How do you measure a “60% beta risk” for a control chart ?
I assume that you are suggesting that your processes were out of control ?
 
“I cannot prove where the 1.5 sigma shift came from, but it seemed to be an effort to compensate for the very high Beta risk (Consumer’s Risk)…[Read more]

Spoon,
This sort of pathetic quote shows that you don’t understand the difference between control limits ( Shewhart’s 1930’s technology) and specification limits (Cp=2 being sick sigma “technology” ).
You might fool CEO’s but you won’t fool anyone who has studied even basic statistics.

Lebowski,
You misunderstood me – I know that they and most people here don’t believe in the 1.5 nonsense – that’s why they are all yawning  ;)
You are right about Harry’s contribution being the part of SS that doesn’t work.  Even Harry says that SS is 80% TQM – that’s the part that does works.
When will the masses throw away those idiotic SS tables ?

Marlon,
What is your preferred justification for the 1.5 ?  That is, assuming you do believe this nonsense and are not just another con man.
Which one :

Harry’s first attempt based on a “shift” ?
Harry’s second attempt based on a “correction” ?
Reigle’s pathetic attempt with his “dynamic” babble ?
Or something new perhaps ?
Stan, Andy,…[Read more]

Bash Me,
Yes, I have read the papers by Evans and Bender.  Have you ?  You wil find them difficult to obtain.  I’m sure very few people have taken the trouble I have.
You may find it hard to “imagine” but Jack Welsh was not a statistician and did not investigate the origins of the 1.5.
Can you prove that Bill Smith introduced the 1.5 ?  No !…[Read more]

Matthew,
Read the start of this thread.  Harry, like all of us, made some mistakes. In the early days, his error was his “theoretical” derivation of 1.5 based on Evans work on stacks of disks.  He started to make lots of money based on his error.  The error later turned to fraud when he made statements about “15-20%” sales loss from well man…[Read more]

Heaven forbid … just forget what they taught you … most of it will be nonsense.  Just read through the recent postings here.

Data never is … see previous threads.
Use control charts … they do not need normal data.

It takes me.  I provide teacher certification.  I can guarantee to give better pricing and better looking and longer lasting certificates than the Institute or anyone else.  Send you email address.

Read “Taguchi’s Loss Function”
A google search will give you everything you need
The thing to remember is that even an in control and in spec process can still cost you and can always be improved

Retail industry, Michigan
 

Hi Arjun,
I did it once and works ok.
Years ago my group of BB and I decice to “fit” our company Six Sigma deployment into DMAIC and it works very well.
We define the strategy and deployment stages, we define ways of measure, we analyze risk (we even use a FMEA), we implement ways to improve the current state of implementation and we do…[Read more]

I’ll set mine as the “minimum” requirements. Anything above that is icing on the cake. I’d love to see the requirements you’ve posted start showing up “honestly” on resumes. And I’d like to see these joke program offerings shut down.

first there should be no difference between “service” and mfg. Meaning you should be training to be a black belt. A good black belt can work anywhere regardless of industry as the study the process/problem not industry. Secondly certification differs depending if you go to a public offering or a company offering. Most companies i’ve deployed six…[Read more]

You earn it. As I stated earlier in another post, the certification is worthless without the experience. I just went through about 100 MBB resumes the other day for a job post, and threw away about 95 of them away because I couldn’t see anywhere on the resume where they had applied the skills.  What do I look for? First, that they were formally a…[Read more]