iSixSigma

Praveen Gupta

Forum Replies Created

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 141 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #188362

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    You must not criticise Six Sigma. We all know it stupid rubbish but we all make lots of money out of it.

    0
    #188302

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    It is a great question!
    Companies do not measure how well their strategy of deploying Six Sigma works, i.e., no company knows its ‘sigma’ level as an organization.
    People worry too much about statistics and rote deployment of the DMAIC methodology and jump to run Design of Experiements as a silver bullet instead of using the methodology to achieve breakthrough improvement.
    I believe statistics is only about 20% of the methodology, 80% of the methodology is sound engineering and the process konwledge. Without the process knowledge and sound engineering, even 100 statistics is not going to produce breakthrough results.
    Praveen

    0
    #165970

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    In my opinion, Armand V Feigenbaum  coined the concept of total quality, and Bill Smith invented Six Sigma.
    Praveen

    0
    #159522

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    iSixSigma is offering eBook publishing services making it easy for everyone to publish ones work.

    0
    #159509

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Stan:
    I appreciate your feedback. I will think about incorporating your input in someway in my future work. Maybe, I should just skip the introductory chapter and get to the point.
    It is interesting to know that different people see different things in the book. For example, one executive loved just one bullet in the book, and purchased it for her organization.
    How could I review your early 90s work?
    Thanks for reading my work!
    Praveen

    0
    #159506

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Jim Ace:
    You have asked some good questions, which some of the participants here may think these are planted questions. To me these are genuine questions that need be answered.
    First of all, I take ownership for developing or inventing the new business scorecard by integrating Six Sigma intent and Balanced Scorecard framework. I developed this because I believe companies need to measure their Sigma level in order to sustain the Six Sigma initiative, and to follow its main tenet, i.e., measure what you value. If you are implementing Six Sigma, investing so much resources, we must measure it to monitor progress.
    To your questions, I will give brief responses. I hope that would help.

    Are the “importance levels” and “weightings” arbitrarily established? The significance of various elements is established based on my experience in dozens of companies, statistical analysis, and discussion with experts. The purpose is to develop a measurement system that would correlate with the reality.
    2. Is the reported “DPU” a measure of defects per unit?  – Yes, but calculated based on the performance of key processes, tangibles or intangibles.
    3.Is the opportunity count based on number of executives? Yes, making them accountable for all the problems in the company. What’s wrong with that?
    4. Does the Sigma score rely on data derived from points 2 or 3? Yes.
    5. Do you consider your scorecard a measurement system? Yes
    6. Do you consider your scorecard a rating system? – The scorecard aggregates all measurements into single measure called Business Performance Index (BPIn). This could be used to rate organizations for benchmarking purpose or identifying areas for improvement.
     
    There is a chapter in the book for validating the scorecard. However, the book also says that it is an initial framework for developing a holistic scorecard that can provide some business intelligence. Not in the exact words.
     
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #159505

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Stan:
    Macroeconomic table is not the main point of the book. It is only a start. Review chapter 4 that should provide details of the scorecard.
    In any case, it appears that you are not satisfied with my Six Sigma Business Scorecard book. I will be glad to buy it back from you for full purchase price. Even though I do not make 100% royalty, I will be willing to bite the dust being your iSixSigma colleague.
    I hope it will alleviate some pain, and give peace. Sorry, my book/ work aggravated you so much. In future, may I suggest to you to ignore my work.
    One thing for sure, you have searched my website, read my bio or resume in detail. That is shows your excellent detective work.
    praveen

    0
    #159488

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Historiography:
    You have asked some very good questions. I have tried to answer some of them for myself. I can share them with you. Agreeing with you about the failure of Balanced Scorecard, Satisfaction meausres, etc., I was asked by McGraw Hill to develop a measurement system based on one my measures of six sigma column many years ago (2002), which I did. As a result, the measurement system is called Six Sigma Business Scorecard (or simply Business Scorecard vs. the Balanced Scorecard), that is based on ten high level measurements in seven interlocking categories (vs. four perspectives). Because of assigned significance to various categories and measurements, process sigma level gets about 20% significance, thus not much affected by 1.5 Sigma shift.
    The scorecard was developed to optimization of business processes for profitable growth. Thus measurements relate to profit and growth. Here is a link for some more info:
    http://qualitydigest.com/IQedit/QDarticle_text.lasso?articleid=4546&-session=ACCESS:47C903C31394f24F13nXnt318A86
    The main intent was to come up with a leading set of operations measures to predict top and bottom line. Other financial measures are influenced by outside uncontrolled factors. Do I have a perfect solution? I wish. As somebody said it here, if I did, I would be a trillionaire. I don’t even want to dream!
    I hope it helps.
    Praveen

    0
    #159487

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Dear Stan:
    Thanks for sharing my qualifications with everyone which I could not do! Knowing you throgh this chat at iSixSigma, you are pretty gutsy to criticize my ideas (which is welcome because it makes me better), my qualifications (I can not change), and my institutions (they are so good their reputation will not be harmed by one person’s comments), and condemning my books (that I hope is not too harmful).
    I do know that it is very easy to criticize, but very very difficult to create a new solution. Any of my work is not a fluke, instead it is based on my experience of 25 years, work with over 100 companies with great results, and previlege to work with people at Motorola, DePaul, Illinois Institute of Technology, and many other organizations.
    I come to iSixSigma to exchange ideas. In doing so, I try to learn good things first in a new idea before I criticize for improvement. Killing is not a good use of the iSixSigma forum. So, please don’t kill my ideas instead criticize based on facts. Of course you do have freedom of speech. People are smart enough to know the truth.
    I am sure everyone here would love learn about your qualifications, which I am sure far superior than mine, experience, and ideas. Go ahead with all the experience you have gained teach us some thing which we are missing. I will be the first one to learn. I learned at Motorola to steal (legally) good ideas shamelessly!
    Keep Stan’s good side alive, and evil side hidden!
    Praveen
    BTW: DePaul’s Enterpreneurship program was rated #2, and part-time MBA program top ten, both nationally. 
      

    0
    #159442

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Some assembly processes used complex boards with as many as 5000 connections, or systems with as many as 5000 parts. Higher complexity of systems also contributed to development of Six Sigma.

    0
    #159441

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Almudena:
    Jim has explained it correctly. Sigma level is a measure of the capability. Again, Sigma level is more meaningful at the corporate level as it accelerates change. Besides, we should be able to relate Sigma level to the financial performance of the company, and use the Sigma level as a leading indicator.  The way I use measures is as follows:
    DPU – Customer measure of performance (customer wants zero defect)
    DPMO – Process level measure (we need to know opportunities that can cause errors or defects)
    Sigma – Business level measure (creates a common language, and incremental change in sigma level means a lot of change in DPMO).
    Praveen

    0
    #159439

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Jim:
    Congratulations for successful implementation of Six Sigma. I have not heard many companies tracking overall Sigma level. Actually, you may be the first after Motorola long time ago when it announced the corporate Sigma level at 5.4. Thanks for sharing the example. We need allies to maximize benefits of Six Sigma at the corporate level through the right metrics. If you would like to exchange information about the corporate sigma level, I will be happy to get your information. My email is [email protected].
    Thanks,
    praveen

    0
    #159408

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    Are you still having difficulty in calculating sigma level using my Six Sigma Business Scorecard methodology? Now it is available in Chinese, Korean, and Lithuanian languages. More help for you!
    Without monitoring Sigma levels, leadership support for the Sigma initiative can not be sustained for long. The executive support will vary like the stock market.
    – Praveen

    0
    #159374

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    hacl:
    Thanks for sharing the quote. I always believed this approach and practiced. That’s why I developed the Stat Free Six Sigma approach. Was it a joint statement by Shewhart and Deming?
    Statistical thinking is more important than statistical tools.
    Praveen

    0
    #159344

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    I have discovered that the four perspectives of balanced scorecard are not enough. Thus my revised list of scorecard are the following:
    Leadership and Profitability
    Management and Improvement
    Employees and Innovation
    Purchasing Suppliers Management
    Operations Execution
    Sales and Distribution
    Service and Growth
    These severl elements formed the architecture of Six Sigma Business Scorecard.
    Praveen

    0
    #159014

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Pierre:
    1981 – 86, I used to work in Semiconductor Sector, and Pre-control was the program of the time. I am sure I do not know about everybody at Motorola, but I was aware, reading and observing happenings in different parts of Motorola including my visit to 52nd St. and other plants in 1984-85 in Scottsdale, AZ. Bob Galvin himself has said that Six Sigma was developed by Bill Smith in Comm Sector.
    I had a great learning time at Motorola in my first job. Actually, I spoke today with one my first role model Manager at Freescale, previously called Motorola after 21 years. It was exciting.
    In any case, I do not understand what we are trying to prove who did what. I just answered one the messages, not proving anything wrong or right. There are many successful, accomplished, and brilliant professionals all listed or otherwise here. I respect them all.
    No Mas!
    Praveen

    0
    #159013

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    I was not that old as you are thinking. You must have a lot more gray hair than I have. I was three years out of school, lucky enough to work on Six Sigma without knowing how big it was going to be. I was not changing Motorola culture like you or some others might be, but I was trying to make “Small Wins to Six Simga” the first four Six Sigma projects, and the “High Five” DFSS project in Schaumburg work. For your information, one of my successful Six Sigma project, completed in 1988′ was published in Quality Engineering in 1990, which was also the success story used in the Design for Manufacturing course. You can buy it from ASQ Press today!
    You are right, I was not making the noise, but I was able to absorb it from all directions. I was and am still learning.
    Thanks for your unusally mild comments!
    Praveen

    0
    #159003

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Mike, You are right. I was in the comm sector 86-89, where the Six Sigma concept was being developed by Bill Smith.
    praveen

    0
    #158985

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Interesting discussion!
    First, is there any Six Sigma capable company? None of the Six Sigma practiciting company measures and sets goals to achieve Six Sigma level performance, so there is a no chance of being one. Besides, customer requirements are dynamic, so it would be difficult to be at Six Sigma level as an entire company, unless the company operates only one process! Six Sigma capable company may not have companya-wide 3.4 PPM defect rate, however, if everyone is improving the process aggressively towards virtual perfection, one may be closest to being called the Six Sigma capable company.
    However, it is not uncommon for a company to have some processes operating at the Six Sigma level capability, i.e., pockets of excellence. But most of these processes are trivial ones. It is difficult to find a critical industrial proecss operating at Six Sigma level, except the process of plane taking off or landing, not the entire flying exprience.
    Regarding my ‘being there’ when Six Sigma was developed, I worked with Bill June 1986 – 89, and sporadically after that for another five years. During that time I did not hear many of the names listed here for their contribution. Six Sigma was Bill Smith’s idea. As to the new things in Six Sigma, it is the process of developing awareness to aggregate performance, highlighting first pass yield, aiming at virtual perfection for customer critical requirements, accelerating improvement, and using common terminology of improvement. The most important observation, in my opinion, was that field failures, perceived as reliability failures, were escaping manufacturing defects.
    Academically there may not be many or any new things, but practically Bill provided new perspectives to improvement.
    As far as I know, Bill did not create belts, DMAIC, or many of the complexities of Six Sigma. Having said that DMAIC looked similar to the four or five phase approach used in one of the Motorola University courses on process improvement.
    His Six Steps to Six Sigma were:
    1) know what you do, 2) who do you do for, 3) what you need, 4) how you do it, 5) mistake-proof it, and 6) continually improve towards virtual perfection.
    Best,
    praveen

    0
    #157559

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Let’s question 1.5 Sigma shift or 3.4 DPMO once we get there. Trying to put too many thoughts in one message.

    0
    #157558

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Six Sigma was designed to solve chronic problems that needed significant resources and a lot of help to produce high yields. Based on its success, we used Six Sigma to more opportunities, then eventually for trivial projects. And lost purpose and value of Six Sigma.
    Six Sigma lost its handle, and was used as a hammer without its handle. The Six Sigma handle is to improve a lot quickly using process knowledge and data, and statistical tools when needed. Now Six Sigma is more about statistics rather than building process knowledge.
    Of course we like to see a new President every four years. It is boring to have a same methodology crowned for 20 years, appears.
    We should welcome change. But we do not throw away our hammer. If we do not learn how to write, does not matter whether we use pencil, ink pen, ball point pen, or computer. In case of Six Sigma we need to learn to strive for perfection. That’s what Toyota aims for. Six Sigma was designed for striving for perfection. (Let’s not question Sigma shift or 3.4 DPMO once we get there!)
    If we design our processes and products with performance targets to produce high yields to begin with, we may not have to use any of the branded methodologies.
    Praveen

    0
    #150302

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Estimated Sigma level for Dow 30 companies came out to be 3.6. My experience tells me that an average company that has not initiated Six Sigma like effort would have Sigma level between 2.75 – 3.25. Of course any company may have a process sigma level at 6 or close to it. But having one or two processes may not be sufficient to move company sigma level.
    In 1992, Motorola’s sigma level was estimated to be 5.2 or 5.4, something like that. To my knowledge, no other company has reported corporate sigma level.
    praveen

    0
    #149272

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Phil:
    your comments are very appropriate about Motorola using Six Sigma. I researched some old documents, and they do say that Six Sigma is an approach to achieve virtual perfection. It does not say anything about statistics, statistical tools, etc. The current definition about being a facts based, statistical techniques, etc. have been added later. Again, the intent was to create statistical thinking among engineering minds, rather than make them statisticians.
    Most of debate about Six Sigma has turned into statistics. That misses the intent of Six Sigma. Yes, the name sound statistical, can be in Greek. But, still we need to look into the intent, methodology, tools and measurements. Most of the tools commonly used in the powerful methodology are non-statistical. I believe most Six Sigma value is realized through intent, methodology, tools, and measurements, in this order.
    I hope it helps to look int the basis of the Six Sigma methodology, not the basis of Six Sigma, the shift, etc. It will sound more common sensical, and be useful.
    Praveen 

    0
    #147709

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Katie:
    Roadmap should tell how to get from Point A to Point B. Or, how to implement an initiative from start to finish. There may be many variations to this. Some look like a roadmap, consisting of several streets, some are similar to a project plan. I hope it helps.
    praveen

    0
    #147046

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    DK
    I do understand it is very easy to criticize, than to propose some suggestions to do things better. As to the lack of computing power, etc. you may want to review Shewhart’s book and how he selected sample size for ease of calculations of x-bar, and s-charts. Sample size of 4 helps in calculating standard deviation, and sample sixe of 5 helps in calculating mean.
    Maybe, you can suggest something more constructive about the shift in the process mean. That would be great.
    prvn

    0
    #147034

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Mikel might have been a successful businessman/ consultant. However, he had not developed Six Sigma, or a similar accomplishment (to my limited knowledge of him). Thus, comparing him with Deming, Juran or Shewhart will not be fare to these great quality people. I know Bill Smith invented Six Sigma, and I worked with him during those years.
    Six Sigma was not designed to be what it has become today. It is all market driven. Thus, the market will decide what becomes of Six Sigma in future. I am not sure what Mikel has added to Six Sigma that needs to be checked for academic integrity. Maybe, I miss something.
    Is there something incorrectly stated or published about Six Sigma that one should be aware of?
    praveen

    0
    #147031

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    I have been following this thread with interest. I could see that people are scrutinizing (I hope I spelled correctly), Mikel’s credentials. I believe his credentials to a degree because he worked at Motorola, and Army. Those records must be true. The question of his integrity and credentials is a personal thing, and maybe, someone who is his superior should look into it. I know I am not qualified.
    My reason for this response is about incorrectly giving credit for 1.5 Sigma shift to Mikel. This was actually Bill Smith’s idea about establishing the 1.5 Sigma shift, which was not based on a lot of data, instead based on a set of assumptions made about the control chart theory. I do not think Bill spent years looking into it. It was a simple empirical decision he made to create the model, and it made sense. As to fine tuninig and academic scrutiny of 1.5 Sigma shift, one can do so today due to availability of more computing power. In good old days, due to lack of computing power, some of the assumptions were made for ease of calculations, even before Bill Smith.
    Praveen

    0
    #145416

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Andy:
    It has been a while we have exchanged notes here. If I remember, in 1981-84, Motorola Fab was using simple process control techniques, and managers were using normal distribution to predict yields, etc. Instead of DPU, they used to have DPW (Die Per Wafer) type measures.
    In 1984, they launched a Pre-Control initiative in all Semiconductor Sector’s plants, Austin, Phoenix, Japan, Malaysia, etc. Then, they started training in  Advanced Statistics, and Planned Experimentation. I may be missing these names totally. However, the intent was using Dorian Shanin’s variation reduction methods, and design of experiments. These two modules later were split in SPC I, SPC II, and SPC III.
    Then Six Sigma was developed. I was involved in it in 1985 in Austin before I moved to Schaumber and worked with Bill Smith. There it was first a simple six steps methodology supported by all the tools known that time or today. Only new thing that has been added since then is SIPOC, and DMAIC nomenclature. Even the DMAIC, in my observation, evolved from our SPC 373 (or SPC 374) course that has a five phase process improvement methodology.
    Rest is still the same, and packaged differently.
    But now, Six Sigma is a comprehensive system, however, its success or TPS/Lean’s success depends upon management’s intent in using it.
    What do you think?
    praveen
     

    0
    #136536

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Aarvind:
    Here is a link to the formula:
    http://main.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=437
    I hope it answers your questions.
    Praveen

    0
    #136484

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Aarvind:
    Here is a link to calculate sigma level.
    https://www.isixsigma.com/sixsigma/six_sigma_calculator.asp
    I hope it helps.
    praveen

    0
    #136418

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    You may need to work with the industry partners, and work on projects accordingly. You can also identify opportunities for improvement in the mgmt. department itself, and address them using the methodology.
    Praveen

    0
    #134815

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    I think people have gotten it wrong. The simple assumption was that until six sigma, the best tool to control process was control chart. I have personally spoken with Bill Smith about 1.5 Sigma shift. It is an assumption about maximum allowable shift. It does not mean each process shifts. Up to the 1.5 Six shift of the process mean (XBar), or standard error of estimate of 1.5 Sigma, it is assumed that process is in statistical control based on the limits of Xbar R Chart.
    Variation is inherent in any system. The motorola six sigma is a model, however, someone can estimate more accurate ppm based on the actual shift in the process mean.
    I do know that Bill had not performed a very complicated statistical analysis to come up with a 1.5Sigma shift. It is more of a practical approach to determine a realistic sigma level compared to the sigma level with ‘no’ shift.
    Again, according to the six sigma methodology, it is not the actual ppm or sigma level that matters as much as rate of improvement, which must be aggressive to force creativity/innovation in developing dramatic improvement
    Praveen
     

    0
    #134581

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Here is the simple reason for 1.5 sigma shift:
    First, it is the maximum allowable shift, not a typical shift.
    Second, it is based on the Shewhart’s subgroup size of 4. If you have a subgroup size of 4, the control limits for an xbar chart will have square root of subgroup size 4, which is 2. Thus the control limits for mean will be 1.5 sigma of population.
    In Six Sigma model, a maximum shift of 1.5 sigma is allowed, considering any shift beyond, which is at a gross level, will be noticed, and corrected. If there is a process, and shift of 1.5 sigma in process mean is not detected and corrected, have a long way to go in understanding and implementing six sigma.
    I hope it helps.
    Praveen Gupta

    0
    #131738

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    What r ur concerns?
    praveen gupta

    0
    #120269

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    It sounds like you agree with Mikel Harry in saying that the R&D, a most influencial process, is normally the worse managed process. Lean is the first visible and streamlining process that can eliminate lots of waste. Six Sigma and Innovation process can build on the working R&D dept. to next level of performance to create economic value, instead of just fancy technical output.
    Yes, good to hear your more mild response. I suppose all is well!
    Andy: Thanks for your comments. Aren’t we hardworking engineers looking for simple solutions!
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #120234

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Six Sigma has four components, namely, the intent/strategy, methodoloyg, measurements, and tools. A right combination of all four can be created suitable for R&D. At the intent level, Six Sigma means a lots of improvement very fast, methodology implies DMAIC, Tools are too many to list, and some of them can be applied to exploit opportunities for improvement in R&D for achieving its purpose/objectives. The last one is measurements. Though measurements can be created to assess improvement and Sigma level in R&D, however, that is the last one to be concerned. The main benefit can be realized from the intent, methodology and tools of Six Sigma.
    Praveen

    0
    #115901

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Aishwarya:
    Just search the isixsigma website, you will get plenty of information. Besides, Google has a ton of info about Six Sigma, even, how to get started. I hope the info will answer your questions.
    Praveen

    0
    #115705

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Here is info from ASQ Website about PDCA:
    Plan-do-check-act (PDCA) cycle: A four-step process for quality improvement. In the first step (plan), a plan to effect improvement is developed. In the second step (do), the plan is carried out, preferably on a small scale. In the third step (check), the effects of the plan are observed. In the last step (act), the results are studied to determine what was learned and what can be predicted. The plan-do-check-act cycle is sometimes referred to as the Shewhart cycle, because Walter A. Shewhart discussed the concept in his book Statistical Method From the Viewpoint of Quality Control, and as the Deming cycle, because W. Edwards Deming introduced the concept in Japan. The Japanese subsequently called it the Deming cycle. Also called the plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycle.
    I hope it clarifies it. Looks like Juran and Deming both are party to PDCA. The concepts of PDCA still goes back to Shewhart years.
    Praveen

    0
    #115704

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    Thanks for insights. I would do further research and learn more about PDCA’s origin. I have been asked to correct either way. When I credited to Deming, people called and said it is Shewhart Cycle. When I credited Shewhart, I hear it otherwise. If you have a specific reference going back in time, that would be appreciated. Otherwise, I will do some digging too!
    Either way, my concern with Check in PDCA still holds. As we implement Six Sigma, our objective is reduce variability around target, not build to somel limits, and calculate Sigma level.
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #115699

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    I can understand the confusion about PDCA and PDSA originators. Here are three references that attribute PDCA to Shewhart, and PDSA to Deming. Have fun.
    http://www.shsu.edu/~mgt_ves/mgt481/Chapter8.doc
    http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite2/toolkit/pdcacycl.htm
    http://www.sixsigmaspc.com/dictionary/PDCA-plan-do-check-act.html
    Thanks for pointing it out.
    Somebody has said, “It is extremely easy to criticize everything, and a little challenging to create something, even if it is wrong!” 

    0
    #115640

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    You are welcome to visit the link. Here is an article about PDCA and PPPP
    http://qualitydigest.com/QDarticles/FMPro?-db=iq%5feditorial.fp5&-lay=article%20data%20form&editorial%20type=ISSColumn&release=yes&-format=QDarticle_text.html&articleID=5866&-script=cntaccesstype&-Find
    I hate to write some other magazine’s article. But, I do cite iSixSigma at other places too!
    Welcome your comments!

    0
    #115637

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    Thanks for your recommendations for John to contact me. Please feel free to give my contact http://www.qtcom.com. I would be more than happy to talk to John, Joe, or Jane, or even you.
    I like isixsigma as I get good feedback to my questions and issues. More importantly, I do take care of my Attendion Deficit Syndrome!
    Thanks for your constructive comments on iSixSigma.com
    Regards,
    Praveen
     

    0
    #115455

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Andy:
    Good to hear from you.  Do you visit States sometime?
    You are right, the five steps could be applied to the ‘improvement’ process.  My curiousity is why and when we all got in the rut of inspection, and cocepts of acceptance limits, instead of building to limits.  Any insights are welcome.
    Acceptance limits are an economic decition to ship the product, however, the manufacturing, or production must be aimed at the ‘target’. I am trying to apply the feedback loop for shooting the production at aim, not within the limits.
    I am not questioning the PDCA, but its potential impact on our thinking in terms of limits. I hope I am communicating this topic well, which appears to be so obvious, but had affected all of us in many ways which we are not seeing yet.
    Praveen

    0
    #115453

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    I must respect your experience of decades, as it sounds like from your response. 
    I would love to learn some specifics about the issues based on your experience, not the execution style judgement to kill.  My purpose is to get some feedback on the questions/ solutions that I have been experiencing.  If I am wrong, I would like to understand. 
    I appreciate your expert-advice on all issues, it makes iSixSigma a little spicy!
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #115452

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello EdG:
    You are right, that some how the concepts of product management, called PDCA, was carried over for process management, that led to the concept of USL and LSL (Upper and Lower Spec Limits), and inspection.  I believe it was not due to lack of mentorship, maybe, just the evolution of the field, and it was overlooked.  As I mentioned, various pieces of it have been addressed by various individuals without linking to PDCA. But, PDCA is the one that is being used as a model for process management, including in ISO 9000.
    As to Andy U. suggesting use of the 4,000 years old concept, the challenge is that it appears to be addressing the management issues, without any step for improvement.
    Thanks for your comments.  I learned something about PSSP.
    Praveen

    0
    #115435

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Ed:  The PSSP sounds closer to 4-P’s, than PDCA.  They all are analogous in a sense that they all represent a closed-loop feedback system.  However, the adverse impact of PDCA has been very significant.  Because people used it to inspection in literal sense to Check.  That’s what adding to cost of poor quality, and building to limits, instead of building to target.  I am still analyzing the hypothesis.  That’s why I am getting various inputs.
    There is a lot more to the PDCA vs. 4-P’s and PSSP because of the context of use.
    Wish you best!
    praveen

    0
    #115426

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello EdG:
    Thanks for sincere comments. You are right, pasta (or the sauce) is a pasta, no matter how we make it, but it can still taste different. Similarly, PDCA, conceptually, is an engineering feedback loop mechanism.
    As I have been teaching PDCA for a long time, in one of these classes, it occurred to me why we end up having problem with quality issues.  Thinking about contributions of Ishikawa, Juran, Taguchi and Deming, I realized that Check and Act elements of PDCA have not helped at all. Besides, these Guru’s have tried to address various elements of PDCA. For example, Ishikawa addressed the inputs in terms of 4-M’s, Juran has always emphasized project management and superior execution, Taguchi has highlighted the value of Target, and Deming practiced statistics to reduce variability. Shewhart being the creator of PDCA, taught us the statistical thinking.
    Knowing the PDCA has been in existence for about 80 years, and appears to be created for managing the product.  I believe the Check might be the root cause of concept of adding more inspection, which I replaced by the Target,  and Act by Progress, implying reducing variability around the target.
    To capture all of these, I have revised the PDCA of product management to the 4-P’s of Process Management. The 4-P’s are Prepare (to do well), Perform (Well), Perfect (verify against target), and Progress (improve by reducing variability around target).
    Any thoughts?
    Praveen 

    0
    #115306

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    Valentine is already over for love and kisses.
    As to better than six sigma, some characteristics do have capability Cp and Cpk better than 2, it means they are better than six sigma in terms of probabilities. Does that make sense.
    Praveen

    0
    #115299

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    For most industrial actions, Six Sigma may be sufficient. I see better than Six Sigma level reject rate for very sensitive (complex systems) and critical applications (safety and very expensive) such as Space Shuttle.
    In industrial applications, before we improve a typical process beyond six sigma, we may look at other opportunities.
    Praveen

    0
    #108081

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Andy:
    Could you please send me your email for discussing some topics.  My address is [email protected].
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #101249

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Gabriel:
    Toyota may not require the standard QMS system as we know.  However, they have their own quite extensive quality system documentation that they use in working with their suppliers.  It is more thorough that a typical quality system I see at many companies. 
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #101233

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Paresh:
    Application of Six Sigma or DMAIC is not required to be a successful company.  Toyota has already mastered its production and design systems, optimized the business model, and use many of the tools identified in Six Sigma methodology.
    If you can build a perfect quality product profitably (i.e. customer is happy), there is no need for Six Sigma. 
    In any case, Toyota has enquired and have assigned some people to look into  Six Sigma methodology.  I believe they have appointed a VP of Six Sigma last year.
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #101162

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Kris:
    Good to see some extension of an idea.  In your expression, I like the idea of speed of innovation, sounds almost like rate of innovation.  To me it is a second order of innovation.  We need to learn first oder, how to innovate before we can speed it up.
    Besides, depth of understanding may be influenced by the complexity of hte subject.  Therefore, both the variables on the right handside of the equation appear to be dependent. 
    As to IQ, studies have been done where IQ has shown no correlation with creativity.  As they say, the average IQ of Noble prize winner is less that that of an average physicist. In any case, continue to refihe the equation. We would end up with similar answers. However, love to hear more thoughts, maybe, you may discover something new.
    My belief is any one of us, I mean any of us, can have Einstein wake up without, if we wanted to.  I have created a challenge for my self to help others discover their hidden Einstein. I do not have an answer, or the method perfected yet!
    Keep thinking!
    PRaveen

    0
    #101156

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Geoff:
    Thanks a lot for sharing your experience and success with Triz. I am not interested in just one equation, that is only one piece of the entire methodology I am developing. I think I have received plenty of feedback about my equation!  I suggest we close this discussion for now. My interest is in developing a methodology that really can be institutionalized for innovation on demand.  I can understand ‘inventor’ suddenly appears too.  We need to go beyond that sudden spark of genius.  I am not claiming to have answers or trying to be one of the ‘great people’ we know.
    One thing is for sure.  Triz is not a sufficient answer for innovation at the rate we need in this informatoin age.  There must be some other stuff that must suppliment Triz, or that’s what Triz must support.  I am trying to get that answer. 
    ———-
    Thanks to you all for providing very constructive feedback. I appreciate your help.  I did not mean to undermine anyone’s capability or intellect.  If I did, I appologize.
    I have found this chatroom a wonderful place for brainstorming and challenging an idea.  I am sure you would agree with that. Kudos to all!
    Look forward to seeing here another ‘annoying’ idea!
    Best Regards,
    Praveen 

    0
    #101139

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Geoff:
    Once again, thanks for sharing details about an innovation that we still enjoy. What would have happened, if his mother had said, “what a stupid idea? Ha Ha!”  You would have missed all these delicious donuts today.
    It is wonderful you use triz for generating ideas, as I do for solving problem.  Irrespective of that, I am not interested in going down the history for anything.  I am interested in generating interest and economic potential now.  I can understand you see a very very little value in the idea of innovating for six sigma.  I see a lot of value in it.  I hope someone is benefitted from it.  Well glass is half full, half empty.  We all take what we can. I am already taking a lot out of it.
    I appreciate your reflections on innovation equation.  Idea management is a first step towards innovation.  We need not be adamant on killing an idea so fast, instead of trying to build on it.  I bet some smart people may be killing it in the chatroom, but working behind the chat to see what’s in it.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #101131

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Gabriel:
    Great effort for analyzing the euqation.  I do not blame anyone for the equation.  I am only trying to learn from someone else’s effort.  I am learning a lot from even people in this room, including yourself.  It is very value added.
    There is no silver bullet.  Even E= mc**2 works in a certain range. So, nothing works in all circumstances. My effort is to try to make it work in the practical range of innovation, not necessarily extreme boundary conditions.  As to the knowledge is concerned, I am sure it saturates in one area.  Just like there is no degree after Ph.D. There must be some limiting factors for knowledge in one area.
    My equation is not finalized yet or fully understood.  We are moving in that direction collaboratively!
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #101130

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Geoff:
    I appreciate your effort to challenge the equation.  However, since you did not invent or innovate the donut, so I trust you do not have enough information to speak for it.
    I admire your love for Triz, believe me I equally like Triz too.  Still, I believe something is missing in Triz.
    The innovation occurs due to necessesity or the opportunity. The one due to necessity involve prior work for many years that is normally overlooked.  We don’t know what that wife had been doing before coming up with that idea.
    The one with opportunity is more driven by delibrate effort, knowledge, play and imagination.
    Try with something you innovate, and try to appreciate the equation.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #101122

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Andy:
    Good to hear from you!  I missed working with Mikel Harry after he joined the Six Sigma Research Institute.  However, I woked with Bill Smith, inventor of Six Sigma (some may question that too), for three years in Schaumburg, IL.
    My contribution was to do the first project in 1987 under Bill’s guidance, that was published in Quality Engineering in 1990, and used in Motorola’s first Design for Manufacturing class in 1988. I also coordinated implementation of Six Sigma projects in Fixed Products Division, of course for my  boss, in 1986-1989.
    I hope that helps.
    MMAN _ Thanks for your encouragement.
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #101120

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    Thanks for encouraging positive environment in the chatroom.  However, I am not selling the idea to CEO’s yet.  I would only sell it once I can prove and make it work.  That’s why I am discussing it at iSixSigma.com, a great place to get opinions, so I can understand pros and cons.  However, I do believe in the model and committed to make it wok with whatever modifications needed.  One has to think about it with an open mind before criticizing it.  I am open to all suggestions or criticism. It is all learning. 
    Have a great day!
    Praveen

    0
    #101119

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    Thanks a lot for all your ideas. I am not taking it personally.  I do appreciate your help. I got a wonderful feedback from you and others.  I can work with it, and hold on to your other thoughts for a while.  I respect your work on  Six Sigma, writing and your experience at Motorola.  I also understand you are having fun in this Chat room. I believe iSixSigma is great to get feedback from so many great people.
    I am not comparing with Einstein at all, not even in my dream.  I am trying to learn from him and understand his work. 
    Have a great day!
    Praveen

    0
    #101117

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Gabriel:
    I agree with you.  Sounds great!
    Praveen

    0
    #101086

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Darth:
    Right on target! Good luck.
    Praveen

    0
    #101075

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    Yes, good questions, and great observations about Taguchi’s Loss Function and Bill Gates’ Speed of Thought. However, my inspiration to come up with this equation is different.
    The euqation does create a conceptual framework for innovation with its key components.  This lead to further work in making progress in those areas.  Six Sigma leads to accelerated rate  of improvement, irrespective of the starting point. Therefore, my intent is to accelerate rate of innovation, irrespective of being able to tell precisely what is the level of innovation. Yes, if I am working with the last drops of our intellectual capabilities, I would be concerned about measuring.  And it should be measured when we can.  Further work is required to achieve that capability.
    I am not done completing this work, as a fact of matter, this has started me to look into lots of possibilities to realize more improvement through methodology, process and measurements.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #101061

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    You are right. I asked for your opinion.  I think I got more than I can handle at this time! Thanks a lot.
    Let me chew this for a while. 
    Stan, at first, I thought you were not sarcastic. I guess I was wrong about your comments last time.
    Best Regards,
    Praveen
    Praveen

    0
    #101054

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Bill:
    Chance or dumb luck can be factored in through a ‘fuzz’ factor, or coefficient of innovation!
    praveen

    0
    #101050

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    Love your writing. I knew this is what I will get from you. Actually, you wrote very well, better than I thought.  I agree that I don’t have answers for all the questions about MSA that you have raised.  I understand MSA is a important aspect of Six Sigma.  
    What happens if you are supposed to build a widget, with its target and tolerances defined.  If we have the capability to build very close to the target.  How much you would want to invest in MSA?  In my opinion, I would love to produce and ship the widget without any testing to keep the cost down.
    I appreciate your feedback and will catch you again. By the way, you put too much emphasis on MSA, in my opinion. Measurements alone do not give the complete picture of any subject.
    What you called my ‘sigma’ thing (my Six Sigma Business Scorecard) is not doing bad. I will be teaching at a University next month, and developing a software soon. FYI.
    Praveen

    0
    #101043

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Mike:
    Here is the innovation string.  I am learing about the ‘string’ theory!
    This kinda brings back my discussion about innovation by responding to the last two messages.
    I understand TRIZ and like using it.  However, there are other pieces that missing surrounding TRIZ that is evident from overall usage vs. its potential for usage.
    Sometimes, things become obvious once it is pointed out. Even though my equation may look like obvious, there is more to it.  Remember, common sense is not so common, and obvious is also oblivious.
    Praveen

    0
    #101003

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Girish:
    The email is [email protected].
    praveen

    0
    #100992

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    I agree with Mike, that tolerance divided by 12 would be a good measure.  Sometime, people also look at Coefficient of Variance, that they calculate by std. dev. divided by the process mean and convert into percentage. For instruments, when they promise % of accuracy,… they use this measurement.  Normally, the 3*COV should be less than 1%.
    Mike, I would love to hear  your comments about my topic of innovation in Six Sigma.
    Praveen

    0
    #100940

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Andy, Mman and Syd:
    Thanks for all your questions about innovation theory.  First, one needs to see teh relationship.  This evolved after I researched the topic and wrote about 40 pages describing the methodology, process.  Still theory was missing.  Theory mean some binding relationship.  I went to visit the Einstein’s exhibit for inspiration.  Suddenly, his equation fit into the model right away. Accordingly, we are continually transforming the form of energy. Therefore, m, the mass can relate to the effort (which scientifically equivalent to work done (massxforce), secondly the speed of light.  We all can experience that speed of thought is much faster than the speed of light.  Therefore, we should be able to apply the E = mc**2.
    You all have raised good questions about measurements.  That’s where further research must be done.  In any case, initially this can be used for self assessment as that can be the most accurate measurement.  The combinatorial play is all about experimentation with different variables, imagination – range of fields one visits mentally, and knowledge – level of expertise. I understand most of them are subjective initially. However once they make sense, methods are developed later to measure if we value it. 
    So, take it as a initial relationship and concept. Build on it to see how it could be practiced.  Any recommendations are welcome.  Your collaboration is sought.
    Praveen

    0
    #100939

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    One can look at Ishikawa’s analysis that come to my mind:
    Material, method, machine, manpower, measurements and environment that affect quality of a process.
    Praveen

    0
    #100503

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    The Forbes articles appear to be missing some credibility.  How one can say that if a company x implements six sigma, it would go under. Or, Six Sigma lacks innovation.  To my knowledge, the basic tenet of six sigma is breakthrough improvement, i.e., innovation.  Otherwise, one can not realize six sigma results.
    I do not think Six Sigma lacks innovation.  However, some practitioners or experts have ignored ‘breakthrough’ aspects of Six Sigma. 
    Six Sigma means a lot of improvement very fast, that is only possible through creativity and innovation.
    Praveen
     

    0
    #100495

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Malvika:
    I guess two companies that come to mind are IBM and Lear (maybe). They both started and quit doing it.
    I would be interested in knowing what you figure out about the topic.
    Mman: you asked about my email for contacting later. I referred to you the article to prevent perception of marketing myself. In any case, it is [email protected]
    Praveen

    0
    #100195

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hey Guys:
    I am no friend of Mikel Harry.  Just like him, I also was at Motorola working with Bill Smith directly implementing Six Sigma (not promoting myself!) And, I also feel like many of us, I compete with him or others for opportunity.
    Having said that, knowing Motorola’s contributions, etc. I still give credit to Mikel Harry and Richard Schroeder, who packaged Six Sigma for reusability (and we all are using it), and commercializing Six Sigma, from which many of us are benefitting.
    Sometimes, I have a hard time understanding why we all are trying to beat up one or two people for something good they have done. They may not be perfect, so are we. They may have ego (who cares). So, why bother what Mikel does. We need to ask the question what we cn do to make Six Sigma better, or apply it more cost effectively.
    Overall, Mikel has done a great job, and he has made a lot of money. Great for him. Maybe, we can learn some of his ‘good’ traits. It is just my opinion.
    Praveen

    0
    #100176

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    I did a survey of people about their work and organizations. I found that every one new what they were supposed to do. A smaller percentage of them knew how well they do, and even smaller number of them knew how much their company had improved over last year.
    Six Sigma drives the improvement at a breakthrough rate. The process owners and managers must know that their job is not to do the job, but make it better. What do you think?
    Praveen

    0
    #100107

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mman:
    My address at this link
    https://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/ask-04.asp
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #100069

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    You made two very important points. Could you please elaborate on these two a little.  I am interested to learn about your statement, “most Six Sigma deployments are failures.”  I am not questioning your comment, instead I am interested in learning more about Six Sigma failures.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #99966

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Andy:
    Thanks for your comments. Interestingly, there will be plenty of books coming out this year. One of them is regarding optimization of Six Sigma, other one is guidance for Master Black Belts (from experts), and last one is Six Sigma for service processes. I hope they turn out to be good books.
    Hope to get together one of these days. If you visit USA, give me a buzz.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #99938

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Ken:
    I heard about this initiative in late 1985 based on whatever charts I have with me from those years. I know we visited 3M in those days, and Benchmarking was popular. However, we do learn from each other. We never would know what Bill knew about IBM or not.
    As I remember, Bob Galvin told John Akers that either he commit to Six Sigma or lose Motorola business.  I believe John started the initiative, but could not sustain due to uphill internal resistance. I felt that resistance in my class too from IBM people. Nothing wrong, just the resistance!
    My two cents.
    Praveen

    0
    #99929

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    There is a column Birth of Six Sigma at http://www.circuitsassembly.com/online/0107/0107sixsigma.shtml for interested ones.
    I do believe that Six Sigma was established based on the benchmarking studies for defect rate, shift of 1.5 sigma, and resulting PPM.  The methodology of integrated product and process development came first before the Six Sigma methodology. It was an evolution that precipitated, to my knowledge, since 1985. I have been told by people who knew Bill very closely, that Bill Smith was working on Six Sigma like concept long before 1985.
    Praveen

    0
    #95077

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Jeff:
    A final note about the Six Sigma Business Scorecard model:
    The model is being refined for launching a national business  performance index (NBPI). It will take a some time before we can act as a leading indicator of the economy. That’s the plan. Any help is welcome!
    Praveen

    0
    #95074

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Jeff:
    The correlation between the profitability of Dow 30 companies and the Business Performance Index (BPIn) is documented in the book. However, there is more work to be done. I would like to correlate the NASDAQ and S&P 500 companies with the BPIn. Once the model is refined, BPIn should be able to predict the economic performance of an entity. That’s the trillion dollar goal!
    The BPIn is used to calculate the Sigma level. Again, knowing BPIn is important. Knowing Sigma level would be helpful to complete the PDCA cycle for implementing Six Sigma process.
    Feel free to raise further questions.
    Praveen

    0
    #95073

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Jeff:
    You are right. If my model could predict better than the stock market, yes, I should be a richer person and would not be posting on this site.
    For your information, the model is new, is a better predictor than the stock market, and is being implemented at companies successfully. I have some additional research to do to fine tune the model. This is a radically different approach and will take some time and money to perfect and be accepted at Universities and corporations. 
    As to posting on this board, I am just getting to learn about the skepticism from the strongest critics so I can address some of the issues. Besides, I like iSixSigma website because it has people like Jeff, Mike, Statman, Reigle and many more. This is a wonderful forum to share the info learn from it.
    BTW: Jeff, your input has been quite constructive and I appreciate that.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #95028

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Jeff:
    Thanks for asking the question “Why should a company calculate a Sigma number?”
    Well, at high level, Mike Carnell’s answer follows:
    The value comes from the work that goes into putting it (a single number) together. If you can calculate it you can take it apart. If you can take it apart you are getting closer to understanding how it works.
    Interestingly, he is absolutely right in this case. Thank God!
    As to my answer, that follows:
    We all, in the Six Sigma arena, have been saying measure what we value. So, if we are implementing Six Sigma methodology, shouldn’t we measure how much we have progresses?
    I agree with you that a number by itself does not do any good. Besides, the Six Sigma methodology is different from other improvement methodologies is that it must have direct impact on profitability. Therefore, there must be a set of measurements that allow a corporation to grow profitably.
    Business is a collection of processes. It is a super process. So we should be able to optimize the ‘business’ process and ensure growth and profitability. In the methodology that I have developed, we identify various profit streams, tangibles and intangibles, establish a business model, then lead them towards profitability.
    Considering we normally depend on the profits as a measure of business performance. Normally, it is too late to find out about it. So, we need leading indicators with some confidence or direct relationship. The business scorecard establishes a leading indicator, I call it Business Performance Index or BPIn, just like one would have a DPU (Defects per Unit) for products.
    Just like we go beyond DPU and determine DPMO (Defects per Million Opportunities) and Sigma, we take BPIn further to Sigma level. The main objective of determining Sigma level for product, process, NASA or a corporation is to establish a benchmark, or a target to achieve, that is a result of collaborative effort and correlates with the profitability. That’s why I have a method, without promoting my book, that one can use to sustain a corporation’s sigma journey for a longer time.
    My reason for developing were simple. I thought it was a missing piece in the Six Sigma journey that all these corporations are doing some thing and do not know how well they have done, or how far they have progressed. Secondly, I really wanted to develop an alternative to the Balanced Scorecard that can impact profitability with assurance. I have not seen an example where a corporation says that the Balanced Scorecard helped them improve the profitability, besides being outdated. The Balanced Scorecard is about 15 years old and is without any improvement.
    The Business Scorecard is being implemented at companies, and I hope to share some success stories at iSixSigma soon.
    There is a lot more to the method of determining Sigma level. All can not be covered here. I am sure you would understand.
    Here is a short answer to your long question!
    Regards,
    Praveen
     

    0
    #94969

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Reigle:
    Thanks for your kind words and could not agree with you more. Any collaborative effort is always welcome as that would make the iSixSigma a better place to add value to its participants.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #94968

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    Wish you very best in your new job and good luck for your new company!
    praveen

    0
    #94920

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    You certainly have right to your opinion.
    I have learned that to criticise a solution is always much easier than to offer a solution. You and I are no exception to it. I am sure you rememer a quote, “Losers find problem in a solution, while winners find a solution to the problem.” Whatever worth the words of wisdom some one has offered, we can learn from that. None of this discussion makes one right, or look better over the other.
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #94909

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    I like your method of determining the sigma level for NASA. It must beaccurate and facts based. Could you please described how did you arrive at the sigma level ‘no better than 3.”
    Praveen

    0
    #94799

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Actually, there is a consultants’ directory at the following link:
    https://www.isixsigma.com/co/

    0
    #94798

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    I got your message! I agree with you about the ISO way. However, my Six Sigma Business Scorecard is designed to sustain the Six Sigma initiative by giving executives some easy to understand score for continual action. BS still means Business Scorecard!
    praveen

    0
    #94771

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Dan:
    Couldn’t be said better. One does not become an expert by taking either 2 weeks, 5 weeks training, or taking certification exam. The BOK is so vast that no one can easily learn all that knowledge which is normally gained in many years.
    We need to find a way to de-emphasize certificaiton, and and focus on improving the process of implementing Six Sigma. Otherwise, just like ISO or other cannon balls, Six Sigma would be on the tail end of another S-curve.
    Praveen

    0
    #94730

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    I did not see the period or question mark. Are you telling me BS (two four letter words), or asking me about it. If it were your question, it is Balanced Scorecard or Business Scorecard.
    Thanks for your comments anyway!
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #94690

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    I really believe you and Stan over-reacted to something without understanding the intent behind it. I do appreciate your feedback though.
    Just a note, it is not the number I am defending. I understand that the number 3.24 may not be accurate. However, I can say with some confidence that it would not be far off from the real number if you can muster accurate info from NASA.
    I am just sharing the methodology to determine corporate sigma level that has been recevied by people very well. I would love to get your feedback if you can try it with some more accurate data.
    Regards,
     
    Praveen
     
     

    0
    #94685

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Gabriel: Good idea! Thanks for your interest in knowing details behind the 3.25 sigma level I have mentioned earlier. Just like knowing flight failure rate has been used to estimate sigma level for the shuttle, the process information can be used for estimating the corporate sigma level. The benefit appears to be that the sigma level arrived using this method appears to be a realistic one. One of the missing pieces in corporations, that are implementing Six Sigma methodology, is that none can tell their sigma level. At least I have not seen one yet. Therefore, I developed this method to measure sigma level as corporations are investing money in Six Sigma. Some one has said measure what you value. Shouldn’t we measure Sigma level if we are implementing sigma company-wide. I appreciate emphasizing facts in implementing Six Sigma. I believe facts are numbers only. However, knowledge with facts helps make the right decisions and makes the measurement methodology more realistic. Either by itself may be insufficient information. Having said that, the following are details of my estimation of NASA’s sigma level. There is a lot more to using Six Sigma Business Scorecard method, however, this just gives you a quick look at it. I hope it helps. If some one disagrees with some estimations, they can change the numbers and re-estimate the NASA’s Sigma level. Regards, Praveen NASA Sigma Level Determination Worksheet:Ref: Six Sigma Business Scorecard, McGraw Hill, 2003 Measurements% Scoreperceived by a tax payerWeightedScore(AxC/100) 1. Employees Recognition (% of employees) 65102. Profitability 3353. Rate of improvement in process performance 2554. Recommendations per employee 100105. Total spend/Sales 4026. Suppliers Defect Rate 2537. Operational Cycle Time Variance 8048. Operational Sigma 2539. New business/ Total 50510. Customer Satisfaction 908Total (BPIn) 55%DPU (-ln(BPIn/100) .598# of Executives (CEO/COO Staff)Assumed15DPMO 59,858Estimated Sigma 3.24

    0
    #94644

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Neelima:
    What people say is one measures what one consider important. If you are working on a project, than you may want to identify input, in-process or output parameters that make sense to you regarding a process’ performance.
    After identifying, one collects data about these parameters and perform statistical analysis to establish a baseline. The measurements could be in terms of DPU (defects per unit), DPMO (defects per million opportunities), standard deviation, and Cp, Cpk. The purpose is to understand nature and amount of variation in the process for the relevant parameters that could adversely be affecting the process performance.
    Based on the baseline, then one can follow next steps in improving the process performance, and be able to verify the improvement in the selected process parameters from the baseline level.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #94641

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    I do not claim to know any thing about NASA. I mentioned this is what my perceptions are. Right or wrong, you be the judge! I am a good life-long learner. The more I learn the more I learn about what I don’t know. And therefore, I am always to open to learn new things. If you have something to share, I would be glad to learn from you too.
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #94626

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Gabriel:
    I am glad you tried to calculate the Sigma level for the shuttle’s success. However, the method I used is really described in the book named after the methodology. I do not want to give perception of promoting my book, even though we all try to share our successes.
    The Sigma level I had calculated was for the NASA organization, instead of just for the shuttle. Shuttle being the most comprehensive activity at NASA, I am not surprised to see your number a little higher.
    My calculation of Sigma level for the NASA organization is based on what I have formulated a set of ten measurements that one can use to quickly determine the corporate sigma level. This is a new method and not many people know about it yet. I expect some skepticism initially before it is widely accepted.  I am glad 3.25 was at the lower end of your confidence interval.
     
    Regards,
     
    PRaveen

    0
    #94613

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Stan:
    Thanks for your selfless and helpful exchanges at the Forum. It has been very helpful with your kind words. Don’t you agree that sometimes it is better to promote self than the rest?
    Regards,
    Praveen

    0
    #94611

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hello Mike:
    You are absolutely correct.
    The Six Sigma value for NASA was determined using Six Sigma Business Scorecard, quantifying perceptions, and making some assumptions. It gives only an approximate initial value. I believe there is no absolute measurement methodology that one could say right or wrong. Therefore, it is a reletive indicator, love to see it someone come up with a better number. The question is whether this number is absurd, or close to reality at NASA. I wonder?
    Praveen

    0
    #94601

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Guesstimated Sigma(NASA) = 3.25

    0
Viewing 100 posts - 1 through 100 (of 141 total)