iSixSigma

Perryman

Forum Replies Created

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 55 posts - 1 through 55 (of 55 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #189407

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Balachandran,
    Not sure what you are trying to achieve here but it seems you have your variables mixed up. Let’s keep in mind that y = f(x), so is this your scenario :
    Y (discrete value of pack damaged or not) = f (x : temperature).
    I am assuming you have determined there is a causal relationship between temperature and damage to your pack.  What about other causes? I’ll assume you’ve ruled out all other causes as insignificant, which means that if you plotted a frequency chart of damaged parts versus temperatures, you would see some kind of pattern emerge.  For example, suppose your pack becomes more brittle at lower temperature and the incidence of breakage increases remarkably below a certain threshold temperature.
    I’ll also assume you’ve validated your VOC (voice of the customer) and determined what temperatures you pack has to withstand.  Your target should be in line with your customer expectations…
    So back to your scenario, it seems you have 2 choices: either find a way to modify the composition of your pack to be less susceptible at the temperature range required of your customer or find a way to control the temperatures your pack is exposed to..
    hope this helps.

    0
    #62547

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Manjunah,
    The Six Sigma methodology applies to any industry. It is a way to resolve porblems.  That said, it is the nature of the problem at hand that will dictate whether six sigma or another method is more aptly suited.  I suppose you will be doing a project for a lab/hospital as part of a course credit system of some sort.  If that is the case, the most important thing is that when you offer your services, you make it clear that the scope of the project must be such that you can actually complete it within the timeframe of your course, or period of apprenticeship.  Whether or not they are currently using the methodology is pretty much irrelevant – you are offering to solve a problem for them….That said, scoping the project is critically important. I would also suggest that it is wiser to tackle a smaller problem, and practice the tools and methodology, rather than to try to handle a complex problem and get bogged down in issues such as cross-functional hand-offs, policy changes, employment or labour-relations, etc.  I think you get my point, these types of corrolory ramifications can easily slow down a project and account for a huge proportioon of effort in major projects.  So in discussing with your sponsor, find a project that can be scoped to one department if you can and work with that department’s leadership to see it through.  Hope this helps and good luck!

    0
    #187613

    Perryman
    Participant

    As Chad says, there is a lot of great (and free) material on this site.  As a matter of fact, you will easily become overwhelmed with the richness of the info here.  Take small bites, read a bit about the methodology and then a few of the articles by using supply chain as a keyword.  I would then recommend you read up a few of the basic tools and try to see how you could try them out for yourself – there is no better way to learning than by doing.
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #62499

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi there,
    Unfortunately you seemed to have misunderstood the question and my response…I was merely clarifying that credentials will not guarantee improved performance – it is the application of what is learned (to obtain those credentials) to the workplace that will lead to improvements.
    Don’t know where you’re going with the interview comment but now that you’ve opened that door, it does create a new potential discussion thread.  So here is my question : For those of you who have hired six sigma practitioners in the past (or promoted from within), have you ever experienced some that had a lot of promise (on paper and throughout the selection process), but who turned out to be duds when it came time to deliver in practice?  if so, what do you think went wrong?

    0
    #62497

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Nupur,
    Just to be clear, a certificate is a piece of paper….It doesn’t improve anything.  What will improve is your ability to diagnose a problem and come up with solutions – hopefully these are the things you will learn during your training and then apply in your job.
    Good luck,
    Patch
    Groupe Synergos

    0
    #62439

    Perryman
    Participant

    Ok. been there.  If you don’t find anything, base your arguments on the benefits (ROI, improved customer satisfaction, reduced waste, etc).  There is plenty of litterature on that and I have summarized a few as related to healthcare for my own campaign here (you can find it here).
    Also, you might want to check out the Alberta or BC health system, I can’t recall which, but they were doing a pilot project on lean in long term care facilities…hope this helps.
    Patch

    0
    #62437

    Perryman
    Participant

    Leo,
    I have to agree with Don on this but I would go even further.  The number of project resources you need is a function of the number of projects you are planning to do in a given year.  And I might add that realistically, since we are resource dependant, the logic usually goes the other way around such as; we have x number of belts, therefore we can only do y number of projects this year. I never found any use for the number of belts per department/proces/whatever type of measure.
    On the other hand, one metric that did become very important as our deployment matured had to do with the ratio of BB to MBB and GB to BB.  Since all our belts had teaching and coaching responsibilities we had to maintain adequate span of control ratios.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #62436

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Stephen,
    There shouldn’t be a large difference in the training.  Most of the time it is just the examples used that are tailored to the audience (ie healthcare).  You already have healthcare experience and you are familiar with that environment and it’s processes so I’m not sure there is much more added value for you personally.  I would be more concerned about the quality of the training and the provider first.  Then check dollor for dollar, if the healthcare vs. the general training is worth the price difference.
    That being said however, there seems to be much more of a need for lean tools than six sigma in healthcare right now.  If your training does not cover lean, I would say find one that does.
    Good luck,
    Patch 

    0
    #62435

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hello Elvis,
    If you cannot find any information as pertains top your exact situation, it might be that projects of this kind have not been shared or publicised.  My advice to you is if you have exhausted your search, don’t worry about it.  What is more important is that you understand the methodology.  That never changes, regardless of the project or setting – then try it for yourself.
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #65256

    Perryman
    Participant

    To add to Don’s response, spec limits are not normally used on control charts.  They are used to determine your process capability and sigma value.  For example, if as you say, your spec limits are tighter than your control limits and your process is in control and producing consistent results, you may be producing defect-free products (within the spec limits).  On the other hand, you may be in control (within the control limits) but producing defects nonetheless if you are falling outside the spec limits. Hope this helps.

    0
    #176379

    Perryman
    Participant

    you wrote : “for the last three months the store has declined 20%-30% monthly before I was asked to assist. The biggest issue is cost. management has been replaced.”
    What has declined? Sales? Profit?
    You’ve had some suggestions, but maybe to the wrong problem..
     

    0
    #168820

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi MM,
    A few questions to clarify; have you done the VSM yet?  Why are you only focussed on removing the transport muda? Have you already applied the other lean principles – standard work, one-piece flow, continuous flow, etc.  Have you ensured they work is not done in batches? Is there “inventory” waiting to be processed by the teams.  It just seems to me that if you haven’t addressed these yet, you are missing alot of opportunities for improvement…
    Assuming you have addressed these, I would suggest you look at an electronic workflow enabler.  There are some pretty good ones out there to support document management and that easily integrate with e-mail systems to provide signals.  I won’t mention any products here but there are a wide variety and some for every budget.  Keep in mind though, that this is an expense to implement – if you haven’t done the other improvements yet – do those first.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch 

    0
    #166087

    Perryman
    Participant

    Agree totally.
    I would also recommend to Michael to look at the performance appraisals used in the company.  What are the criteria used to assess employee performance? Do any reflect the companie’s desire to have a CIC?  If not, why not? That has to change…If so, get the data.  You can then track it to see if there are any changes over time.  Working with HR is crucial and this is a perfect opportunity to integrate CIC with organizational development.  Imagine that, an integrated system that aligns visions, goals, priorities, reviews, and rewards.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #166085

    Perryman
    Participant

    I agree with George here and would also add a couple of suggestions.
    If the comments are related to the Lickert score, concentrate first on the extremes:
    1. Find trends or themes in the comments.  Try grouping them with affinity techniques.  Any major issues pop up?
    2. Look at frequencies of recurring comments to build a type of pareto. ie. if everyone is saying the same thing when they are really satisfied or dissatsfied about something, chances are it is worth highlighting.
    For comments not related to a Lickert score – I don’t know how your survey was built but sometimes they just ask for general comments – follow the two steps above but unfortunately, for the second step, you have no way to link this to any quantifiable data from the scale so that part of the analysis cannot be done. However, you may still find some interesting information such as recurring suggestions for improvement, etc.
    I have done this type of analysis in the past – usually for training surveys – but never to the scale you have.  You have quite an undertaking, I suggest you get some help with the grouping exercise.  
    Good luck,
    Patch 

    0
    #166083

    Perryman
    Participant

    Bill,
    If you know you are missing some defects in the inspection process, do you know which ones are slipping through?  Are there any trends? This may be able to help you focus your improvement efforts.  With this information, you may also look back upstream rather than at the inspection stage, to see if you can mistake proof those errors or at least catch them earlier on.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #164530

    Perryman
    Participant

    Andrew,
    I agree with Annon.  Since you are looking at evaluating the effectiveness of a technology, could you not look at the mission results as your key output variable and determine the impact of the technology on it versus the results achieved without the technology?
    My 2 cents (as a former army requirements officer)

    0
    #163736

    Perryman
    Participant

    Well said, brandon.
    I myself switched to this pseudonym several years ago when I saw someone else had and was posting with the same given name as me- been Patch ever since and have not noticed anyone else using it, so it stuck.  I think there is even a thread between myself and Mike discussing the merits or risks of my choice.
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #61748

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Bill,
    you may want to consider looking at this problem differently.  The most common reason for overtime, when department heads are asked, is that they don’t have sufficient staff to accomplish all that they have to do.  Then the question becomes – what are they doing that is so time consuming?  Look at what your people are working on.  How much of what they do in a day or shift is adding value? Then take steps to remove waste from their processes. 
    With this approach, overtime is a symptom of ineficiency and waste.  Reduce these and overtime goes down.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #61747

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Bill,
    Not sure what you mean by the “old fashioned way” but you could plot your historical spend data on a control chart to see if there are special causes in your spending.  You could also plot on a time series chart to figure if there are patterns such as end of month or quartlerly spend sprees.  You might also what to look at these spend patterns in comparison to how budgets are allocated and re-allocated to see if the process drives certain behaviours – and spend.
    I have seen yearly budgets allocated on historical spend, so if you don’t spend, you don’t get it types of behaviours..
    Hope this is the type of advice you were looking for.
     

    0
    #163337

    Perryman
    Participant

    Andrew,
    My question to you is why would you want to compare the two materials in the first place?  Shouldn’t you just be testing to make sure that the new material produces a final product that is of equal or better quality.  I am not sure why you are considering re-sourcing but assuming it is for cost reasons, if using the new material produces a product that falls within acceptable limits – and is cheaper – than there is no need to compare the two raw materials.
    My 2 cents,
    Patch

    0
    #163332

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Sandy,
    CEOs are used to seeing things from a higher level.  If he/she identified this as an area needing improvement, you will need to clarify the problem before heading down the wrong path.  My guess is the CEO has earmarked a general problem area base on feedback from the organisation.  The last thing thing you want to do is establish metrics and improve on something that is not even perceived as, or not the most important problem, in the first place.  Take the time to meet with the sponsor – your CEO in this case, to clearly define the problem – seems like you will have to scope it down in this case – and agree on a project charter.  Then you will understand his/her expectations and get to work.
    Hope this helps.
    Patch

    0
    #162177

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Mike,
    Been a while.  We should get back in touch.
    514.873.7414

    0
    #162161

    Perryman
    Participant

    I agree with Chad’s logic but you have to also consider the question from the customer perspective.  Why are you doing this project in the first place?  In my experience, it is probably because the “customer” is waiting too long for whatever it is that is coming through the receiving door.  They don’t care if it is sitting on the dock or in process, they just want the part or product.  If this is so, you have to set your process limits accordingly, otherwise you might miss the boat.
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #64779

    Perryman
    Participant

    Raja,
    Don’t get too caught up in the weeds on this.  As long as an opportunity is defined and is meaningful to you, that is what is important.
    If the type of error is meaningful such as grammar, data, arrangement, as you mentioned.  Use each type as an opportunity (category), that way you could stratify your data by opportunity afterward.  If it isn’t then keep it as straightforward as possible – 1 document = 1 opportunity.
    The only thing to remember is that the greater the number of opportunities, the greater your sigma value will likely be.  However, if you use the same measurement system for your baseline and improvement, what you are really interested in the relative improvement from your baseline sigma value, so the number of opportunities is really irrelavant.
    As for measuring reviewer effectiveness, it sounds like you have to do a Gage R&R.  There is plenty of information on this on thuis site.
    Hope this helps,
    Patrch

    0
    #61577

    Perryman
    Participant

    Thanks BritW,
    Who decides on the projects and priorities of effort?  How are they determined?

    0
    #61550

    Perryman
    Participant

    I agree with you.  I have been trolling the net for 2 months now trying to but together a portfolio of healthcare related project examples.  Most of the examples lack sufficient detail.  I have found some through ASQ and also some of the ASQ publications I have acquired such as:
    “Improving Healthcare Using Toyota Lean Production Methods”, “Lean guide to transforming healthcare”, and “Measuring Quality Improvement in Healthcare”
    Hope this helps,
    Patch
    p.s. If you do find detailed examples, please share. My e-mail is patrick.pressoiratmsss.gouv.qc.ca

    0
    #64731

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi,
    About 5 years into our deployment, it was decided that we would integrate IT and Six Sigma under the responsibility of the CIO.  The logic was that we wanted to sensitize the organize to the strategic importance of both IS/IT and Six Sigma as enablers of strategic business improvements.  As such, the new entity became known as Transformation Services.  The intent was good.  Looking back now, I would caution to avoid the following pitfalls:

    Be careful not to let your SS deployment get absorbed into an IT PM type of a role.  If this happens, you lose the greatest benefit of Six Sigma approach which is the creativity of coming up with innovative solutions to problems – not everything requires a software solution.
    You have to find way to create synergies within the two groups without forcing the IT PMs to always use DMAIC.  Sometimes there are Just Do It types of problems that don’t require DMAIC.  On the other hand, sometimes there are requests for IT solutions that merit a closer look through a DMAIC type approach to ensure root causes are addressed.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #152756

    Perryman
    Participant

    Eve,
    It appear the link you provided refers to project scope change.  Not the change being covered in this thread.
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #152623

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Jim,
    I tried to reply to your e-mail but it bounced back.  Do you have an alternate?

    0
    #152551

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hello all,
    Been away from the forum for awhile.  This thread caught my eye because I am currently developing a practical change plan approach that can be overlaid on the traditional project methodology, but I’ll get back to that.
    I must say the digressions and agressive posts in this thread are alarming and discouraging.  I hope this is exceptional because I greatly enjoyed the open and convivial forum of a year ago.  Maybe some posters should read (or re-read) the Forum etiquette guidelines…
    Back to the topic at hand.  In my experience as BB and MBB, I was trained in both the project methodology and also change management but I always found the integration of the two to be extremely weakly linked.  The GB and BBs I would coach always seemed to have a hard time understanding how to obtain the pulse of the stakeholders and to gage their projet’s likelihood of success.  And even if they did catch some of the signs, they would struggle with the reality of how hard it is to actually deal with resistance to change.  So this is why I am undertaking this challenge. I have a short questionnaire that pertains to change that I have used gauge the change readiness of stakeholders and then adapted my change strategy accordingly.  In practice, it seemed to work but I want to test some theories on it.  If anyone is interested in having a copy, please e-mail me at : patrickdotpressoiratmsssdotgouvdotqcdotca
    In exchange I will ask that you fill one out for the data collection I will use for my thesis.

    0
    #60591

    Perryman
    Participant

    How about this one.

    Severity Criteria
    Occurrence Criteria
    Detection Criteria

    Hazardous without warning
    10
    >= 1 in 2
     
    Absolute Uncertainty
     

    Hazardous with warning
    9
    1 in 3
     
    Very Remote
     

    Very High
    8
    1 in 8
     
    Remote
     

    High
    7
    1 in 20
     
    Very Low
     

    Moderate
    6
    1 in 80
     
    Low
     

    Low
    5
    1 in 400
     
    Moderate
     

    Very Low
    4
    1 in 2000
     
    Moderate High
     

    Minor
    3
    1 in 15,000
     
    High
     

    Very Minor
    2
    1 in 150,000
     
    Very High
     

    None
    1
    <= 1 in 1,500,000
     
    Almost Certain
     

    0
    #60590

    Perryman
    Participant

    RDogg is correct.  I use it a a facilitator’s back pocket tool to help generate more improvement/solution ideas when there is a lull in a brainstorm.  You can also provide this list ahead of time to participants to get them thinking prior to the meeting (preface it by “how can we make xxx better by…”)
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #60512

    Perryman
    Participant

    Dear Alex,
    The purpose of the stakeholder analysis is to gain a better understanding of the stakeholders impacted by the change initiative.  You want to know how much they will be impacted (which will determine the level of support you require from them) as well as what their current level of support is.  That way, you can focus your influence strategies and commmunications on the critical audiences.  I use this tool for almost any change I do (project or not).  Send me an e-mail at patrick dot pressoir at ca dot crl dot com at I will send you my template.
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #113169

    Perryman
    Participant

    newbb,
    You might also want to look at some creativity tools used to get people into an “out of the box” thinking mode such as mind mapping or picture associations and then try using a morphological box to find even more alternatives.
    Examples of these can be found in the QPC memory joggers.
    Good luck,
    Patch 

    0
    #111819

    Perryman
    Participant

    Dear Unsure,
    It seems to me you have to figure out what it is you want the data to tell you before you go out and measure.  You already seem to say that measuring is not easy so don’t waste time and effort on it if it won’t help you to identify the critical X’s in your process.  You already have data on your process output, you say it yields about 75%.  What you need to measure is related to the key input variables.  I suspect you should be looking on getting data on the process steps you described upstream.  How are they “mixing” and what are the conditions of this process?  You might be better served by tapping into the organizational knowledge before going out and measuring.  They will tell you where to look for the most likely root causes…
     
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #108954

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi David,
    What is it you are trying to show? That the measurement system is effective in terms of predicting a result or in terms of consistency of output?  I’m not sure what ranking system you’ve used – have you looked at Multiple Attribute Utility Theories such as BCG or AHP, or Smart.  These are pretty effective.
    If your intent was to measure whether, for example the outcome of one of these ranking methods was indeed the best, it would imply that you want to compare the expected (predicted) result with the actual result – you could maybe consider Chi Square.  If, on the other hand, you want to compare the ranking results among groups or between groups – perhaps a GR&R is the way to go…
    Food for thought.
     

    0
    #94527

    Perryman
    Participant

    Amitabha,
    I am curious to know what your key process metrics were to obtain these sigma values.  What were your defects defined as?  Also, are they short term or long term?
    Thanks,
    Patch

    0
    #93446

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Mike,
    Still waiting for you to call be back…
    Patrick

    0
    #88536

    Perryman
    Participant

    Billybob,
    I agree that the process map must be useful.  In fact we intend to baseline all our processes for several reasons:

    So we understand what it is we are actually doing
    So others could understand what we are doing (especially new employees)
    So we could measure and then identify improvement opportunities
    So in answer to your question, no we are not only concerned with VA activites.  We want an accurate picture of the AS IS in sufficient detail to permit someone to read it and do the job.  What I’m trying to get is some advice on other similar experiences in deciding what level of detail should appear on the map or in an accompanying instruction, for example.
    Thanks for the CTQ idea, though…
    Patch

    0
    #88517

    Perryman
    Participant

    I didn’t get any replies to my post in February so I thought I’d give it another try………….
    Hello all,
    I am working on developing a reference tool to help BB and GB with mapping processes.  One of the recurring problems encountered is the inconsistent level of detail from one map to another and even within maps.  For example, in one task level map we’ll have : REVIEW THE CONTRACT, ADD COMMENTS, OBTAIN APPROVAL, SUBMIT FOR TYPING.  While in another we’ll have : REVIEW THE DOCUMENT, ADD COMMENTS,  OBTAIN APPROVAL, INITIAL COVER SHEET, MAKE 2 COPIES, SUBMIT ONE COPY FOR TYPING, FILE OTHER COPY….We intend to provide guidelines to help determine process tiers but I am wondering just how much detail should be included in a task level (lowest level) map.  I am aiming for mapping consistency and also would like to have the real detailed stuff documented as supporting instructions.  Does anyone have an easy definition of what constitutes a task that we could use? Or suggestions/lessons learned…….
     

    0
    #88049

    Perryman
    Participant

    Be careful converting % to Sigma.  If you say you are satisfied with a value less than 100% then why are you considering less than 100% as defects?
    In other words, 2.2 Sigma may be perfectly acceptable for you.  Or use another method to calculate your sigma value, by DPMO, based on the customer satisfaction threshhold, for example.
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #88048

    Perryman
    Participant

    You’ve had some good advice so far.  Don’t jump to conclusions yet about what the customer wants until you have a better understanding.  You can use a Kano analysis to get a better idea of customer requirements.  This will tell you if you are wasting your time trying to improve performance of a criteria that will only provide marginal or no gains in customer satisfaction.
    You can check out the tools and templates bar on the left or drop me a note for more details.
     
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #79254

    Perryman
    Participant

    Youch!  You just made me realize that maybe I should change my nickname.
    I wouldn’t want people to think that I’m a BB that just comes up with quick fixes……
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #79250

    Perryman
    Participant

    Amen.

    0
    #79247

    Perryman
    Participant

    Ruben,
    Haven’t seen this per se but my guess is that the union is associating Six Sigma with process improvement, re-engineering, reducing waste and NVA.  Not a bad thing, but this is probably being translated into – cutting jobs.
    By having six sigma improvements discussed in collective agreements, they are effectively putting in a right of veto to any project that changes membership working conditions.  This is not necessarily a bad thing, but they become a critical stakeholder to consider in every project.  You have to make sure that they are aware of projects and buy into the improvements before you get too far.
    This can also protect union membership numbers (that’s were they make there money) by ensuring that there are a trade-offs for cutting a job somewhere (improving benefits, creating other union jobs elsewhere etc).
    All-in-all, I understand the requirement for this kind of check and balance, but this kind of arrangement could seriously affect project momentum.  If the union is powerful or is not really sold on improving the company (not just their position), you risk not making serious improvements and thwarting the success of your program.
    My 2 cents.
    Patch

    0
    #79009

    Perryman
    Participant

    fishbowl,
    Your first sentence sums six sigma up quite nicely, but I would say that the statistics part only represents about 10% of a project.
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #79003

    Perryman
    Participant

    SWagg,
    First define your Defects:  In your post, would conclude that a defect is an employee is not using the correct version of job aid.
    Next what is a Unit:  In this case, I would suggest that a unit is the employee doing the job (120).
    Next: What are the opportunities of a defect.  I see 2. Either the wrong revision or the wrong aid.
    Therefore your TOP is 2×120 = 240
    Good luck,
    Patch

    0
    #78933

    Perryman
    Participant

    Kevin,
    Sorry, I forgot to answer your second question.
    I’ve always worked on projects where I knew very little about the process at the outset.  The project team is where the expertise should be.  This has been a successful formula for me for 2 reasons:
    1. I have been able to question things the experts no longer see or take for granted. 
    2. Being the “methodology expert”, I can lead them through the project wherever the process area.
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #78932

    Perryman
    Participant

    Kevin,
    You’ve had excellent advise from the replys to your post.  Bottom line – you can’t pigeon hole a good BB into a particular vocation.  Rather, it is a skill set that you are looking for that virually transcends all high performers regardless of their current position. 
    I recommend you concentrate on behaviours and competency profiles in your search.
    Good luck,
    Patch 

    0
    #78827

    Perryman
    Participant

    Sachin,
    You should clarify the question.  It is way to vague.
    In good Six Sigma form – figure out what the customer’s needs are first, then work to meet them.  (pretty corny, but what kind of teacher would leave you out to dry if you provide them with all these different possible angles to their assignment anyway?)
    Good luck

    0
    #78627

    Perryman
    Participant

    Paul,
    I’m no expert but I believe there are 2 schools of thought to this question.  The first is you have to look at what the project is providing in terms of your cash flow.  If your current state says you are tying up $100K of cash in inventory, and your improved state is that you will only be tying up $25K in the future, then you are effectively “freeing up” $75K.  This savings methods is relized once you “use up the $75K of stock and don’t have to spend any cash to replace it.
    You also mention the other school of thought which is to calculate the inventoy carrying cost. e.g. the value of the cash tied up to carry the stuff.  This is a bit harder to quantify, but it is also done.
    I had a project and we calculated it both ways just to see.  They came to about the same savings anyway so the debate was moot.  I suggest you discuss with you core team to set a standard and stick to it for all your projects.
    Hope this helps,
    Patch

    0
    #78372

    Perryman
    Participant

    Mike,
    I e-mailed you last week for details about your upcoming speaking engagement in Toronto.  Please disreagard (I found the info on the website)
    Cheers,
    Patch 

    0
    #78371

    Perryman
    Participant

    Welcome back Mike!  I totally agree with you. 
    My additional advice to Poornima would be that if your efforts to make changes are consistently shut down, maybe it is time to move on……After all, to be happy as an individual, you should make sure the organizational values system are in line with your own.
    My 2 cents.
    Patch (Formerly Patrick)

    0
    #78330

    Perryman
    Participant

    Hi Elsa
    The addition of 1.5 in your first formula is to convert your sigma value into short term.  The common understanding is that in the long term, you will have shift and drift in your process, which will therefore produce more defects and consequently lower your overall sigma value.  Since your formula uses discrete data to start (which is considered long term already), you have to at the conventional 1,5 to reflect a short term sigma value.  Many organizations express their sigma values in the short term, by convention.
    You can read more about this by clicking on the Six Sigma Q&A on the blue bar.
    As for the second formula, I haven’t plugged any numbers into it yet but I suspect the natural log is to illustrate the non linear nature of sigma versus defect rate while the sqrt of 29.37 added to the 0.8406 allows for a sigma value in your equation even when you have a DPMO of zero.
    Cheers,
    Patch

    0
    #78329

    Perryman
    Participant

    John,
    Please refrain from promoting your product or service in this forum.
    Thanx,
    Patch

    0
Viewing 55 posts - 1 through 55 (of 55 total)