Forum Replies Created
Forum Replies Created
- February 12, 2010 at 4:11 am #189333
Valid point, but the same point could be made about a college
degree or an education in general for that matter. You sit in a
classroom for years discussing the theoretical and then you
graduate having never (or rarely) applied your knowledge to a real
world application. You go out into the job force, apply for a job as
an engineer (for example). Are you tried and tested? No. But you
are still a degreed engineer. Only time and experience will teach
you the lessons that could never be taught in the classroom.Whether you cover the course material on your own time, or while
at work, at some point you will finish the course and have zero
applied experience with your new found/learned talents.I guess what I am trying to say is that I would rather be a “rookie”,
“noob” or “inexperienced” BB ready for my first real world test, than
not try to move forward at all. You can’t jump for inexperience to
experienced, without passing through the gray area in the middle.0February 11, 2010 at 5:13 pm #189317
Engineering/Manufacturing…Great suggestion! I guess I hadn’t really thought about that angle.0February 11, 2010 at 5:11 pm #189316
Any info you guys could share would be firstname.lastname@example.orgThanks,
Jason0February 11, 2010 at 5:10 pm #189315
Sorry…this was supposed to be a reply to another thread.0February 11, 2010 at 1:08 am #189266
I’m in a similar boat. I was certified as a Green Belt several years
ago and have been using the principles on a regular basis.
However, last week I was laid off. My “dream job” is to work as a
black belt…but the lack of the certification is holding me back. I
have decided to focus on this while I am on the job hunt. I’ve look
at a few online courses and just need to make a decision.asq looks fairly straight forward
Villanova offers an online class for about twice the price, but to my
knowledge you have lectures you can watch rather than 100%
independant study. Still researching…what did you end up deciding?0December 17, 2008 at 1:11 pm #178798
There are alot of “best practice” examples located right on this website. Go to the isixsigma.com “home page” and scroll to the bottom of the page. There is a heading titled “six sigma directory”. In that section, there is a link called “Best Practices”. I think you may find what you are looking for in here….. Good Luck!0December 16, 2008 at 6:28 pm #178764
…sorry, I meant LOGO, not “log” as I typed in the previous post….0December 16, 2008 at 6:27 pm #178763
Somehow, I don’t think this was the log that Terrence was looking for. But I’d be interested in finding an official Six Sigma Certified Black Belt Log as well….0December 11, 2008 at 11:57 pm #178627
The M+M’s are most certainly a quality issue since the local governments are deciding the minimum standards. That is, they want to know how to define / what metrics are used to determine a “chocolate”. Anything above these percentages “meet” the minimum specifications. Anything above that must be judged according to new standards. It is the same definition of what is “healthy” or “green”. An area that lawyers are quite good at arguing about.0November 13, 2008 at 10:11 am #57651
Have you defined the problem you are trying to address or at this stage are you tasked with “improving productivity”
If you have a clearly defined problem statement you can map out the current process, and by using Y=f (x) transfer function identify the critical input metrics and resultant out put metrics. this will give you the KPI’s relevant to your process.
0October 30, 2008 at 1:33 pm #177236
Suggest they sort by date, lot, or other logical grouping and provide mean and st dev for each lot. I would take a look at distribution type a a precaution.0August 26, 2008 at 3:43 pm #175190
Sounds like clarification is needed on what x and y needs. If go ahead can’t be given without a sequence of calls and delays then clearly not enough information is being presented in the first contact.
I would suggest a VOC exercise to identify some CTQs, these would become minimum info for first exchanges.0July 8, 2008 at 5:23 pm #173628
All of the data and upper/lower specs and target value is in dBm. However, when I convert everything (specs, data, target) to mW, I get a different Cpk value.0June 26, 2008 at 5:45 pm #173268
i would love one as well…
jasonckosakura.com0March 26, 2008 at 11:22 pm #170098
Could you send me a copy of the video as well?
Thanks.0May 28, 2007 at 8:53 pm #156678
Yes, usually the local ASQ chapters teach refresher courses. Also, ASQ itself has an online refresher course. Hope this helps0January 25, 2007 at 11:38 pm #59004
Villanova University has the best Six Sigma Training program, in my opinion. Try http://www.villanovau.com.0January 3, 2007 at 5:55 pm #149873
Going from 10 days to 3 days is mighty aggressive. Besides prayer and ‘unadvised shortcuts’, where Ive seen accounting departments improve is simply streamlining individuals tasks, month end only tasks as well as day to day. Where you can measure is the gap in time wasted as folks wait on one another before they can begin their tasks. Ive seen where several will have their small part to do as part of month end. A big improvement came when just a few did several of the tasks necessary. That will reduce the gap time. Not to mention, no matter the day of the week, the ball must be rolling on the 1st!0December 28, 2006 at 2:39 pm #58960December 28, 2006 at 2:28 pm #149593
Thanks for the post. I’ll try my best to answer your questions.
1) Vendor or Supplier Recovery is an extension of the Warranty business. Basically, we are looking to recoup costs from the supplier of the part being repaired / replaced by the customer. In our case, we are the administrator or middle man for the warranty between the customer and the supplier. The process begins when a part is in need of repair and is under warranty, as identified by the folks on the floor / technicians servicing the product. Supplier Recovery then validates and settles the warranty to ensure that the vendor pays the costs as documented. The value of such a department, as I see it in my 2mo exp, is cost savings and customer satisfaction.
2) This process / department is only a year old. The perception is that it is not an efficient process. My role has been to develop a financial reporting package and now to assess the process for efficiencies (I was selected to do this as I achieved Green Belt status just this fall while in the healthcare industry.). There are some metrics and benchmarks I have found, so this project will be to assess where we fall within these benchmarks, which include cycle time. The downstream benefit to the area includes identifying quiality issues, improving customer satisfaction, reducing warranty costs, % of products returned for repair, % of annual revenues to support warranty claims, etc. But again, no one has mapped out or assessed the time and resources used by the analysts in the Supplier Recovery area to do their job. I sat with one of them for about 2hrs and noted that she had to use 7 programs to do her job.
I have been through some lean initiatives, but they were not formally managed. That is the primary reason I am looking for some guidance. This will be a very high profile project and I want to make sure it is managed properly.
Hope this helps.0December 15, 2006 at 4:40 pm #64575
Could you send me the 8D report templates?
Thank you0August 7, 2006 at 6:47 pm #141500
Please contact me at my email address email@example.com and I can give you some details.
0May 4, 2006 at 3:29 pm #137235
Sorry my sample sizes for both 1 and 2 is 42676 and the defects are for sample 1 is 50 and sample 2 is 1330April 18, 2006 at 3:28 pm #136507
Thanks, ive already ran the first 3 tests but as for the others i think ill leave them alone.0March 22, 2006 at 7:59 pm #135373
Yes it helps and thank you, I meant to say in my post that i was going to use the 50 not the 90. Also my main concern is my Zscore, im currently doing Black Belt training but I have nobody to get any help from in my office at the moment. Would you be able to tell me how to calculate the Zscore for the 800 and 400.0March 14, 2006 at 12:26 am #134987
That is very surprising to me. Are there any consultants training six sigma in the market wanting to chat? Please email me. Thanks
firstname.lastname@example.orgMarch 13, 2006 at 6:32 pm #134963
You need to establish your initial level of quality before you can accurately establish your sample size!!0January 27, 2006 at 2:50 pm #132984
In a library environment, I’d imagine a lot of the applications would be using lean tools to streamline the transactional processes. When I worked in a library, most of the pains came from checking books back in and getting them out on the shelves. Another area to examine would be in book procurement- know your customer and stock the books that have the greatest potential for use. I know many libraries have and order new books that may go unread for years- and that’s a problem.0October 19, 2005 at 4:43 pm #128492
powerfull scumbag lead to corruption0June 28, 2005 at 8:12 pm #122306
The Blackbelt is an expert in the DMAIC tools, yes, and as such can theoretically walk into any situation and guide an effort to project completion. But if he/she comes from any other department or consulting firm or even your company’s Quality organization (especially? from Quality) it will be seen as an unwanted invasion by someone who “doesn’t even know what we do” and “just wasting a lot of time we could have used doing work.” That simple perception/attitude is Six Sigma’s biggest enemy. Anything you can do to head that off is to your advantage, and that starts with letting the process owners (or as close as you can possible get to the process owners) own the improvement effort.0June 28, 2005 at 7:52 pm #122304
SS must be openly and convincingly supported from the very top of the pile of managers allocating people’s time and workload (if not, it will always be swept to the side to get “real work” done).
The people directly involved with SS must be the people who have direct control of process design and procedures. When the Quality organization is comprised of process non-experts, they serve the valid role of establishing acceptable defect rates, assuring that those limits are met, and that company policies are followed. And, honestly, that is a valid function. But in such an organization, SS belongs in engineering or production/operations (again, with whomever has control of the process design/execution and procedures/documentation). If the Quality organization possesses process experts and control of process design/procedures, then, by all means, Six Sigma could reside there. Otherwise, let Quality set quality requirements and let the process owners deliver to those requirements (using SS as may be necessary).0June 14, 2005 at 10:17 pm #121409
Ppk is a measure when you have “long term” data, i.e. over multiple days / shifts / weeks, etc.
Cpk is more of a short term measure; at the start of a project / product launch, you may only have a small amount of data.
Short term data is said to “shift and drift” about 1.5 standard deviations over the long term.
Either is a good measure of capability, you just need to know if you have long term or short term data. To select whether to use Cpk or Ppk.0June 9, 2005 at 10:31 pm #121135
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate (and deal out) sarcasm as much as the next guy….or next Stan in this case. But for now, let’s save it for the regulars who feed off it so well. Let the newbies tread water for at least a little while at first.0June 9, 2005 at 10:26 pm #121131
yeah, I deserved that one…0June 9, 2005 at 10:25 pm #121129
Do you really believe that you were one of those I was referring to??
When I first read the string, there were 4 whom had replied. 2 replied with some sort of answer, and 2 went after the guy…although Stan’s reply was more sarcastic than attacking. And since my original post, HeeBee has been kind enough to apologize to the guy for his reply.
So I guess this whole issue should be put 6′ under. I posted because too many times I read replies that are just uncalled for. It seems as though the virtue of patience has been lost by a couple of the Forum’s frequent flyers.0June 9, 2005 at 10:07 pm #121120
I have no problem with yourself or anyone else in the forum. I was just making a point about how some here are so very quick to pull the trigger and fire away, even though their target hasn’t made any attempt at attacking them.
It is, however, amazing that the person who calls them out on such behavior is believed to be the one with the problem.0June 9, 2005 at 10:02 pm #121115
0June 9, 2005 at 9:33 pm #121107
Get back in the boat Erick. You have taken a swim with a minor cut, and sharks can smell 1 drop of blood from miles away.
This string is starting to beg an answer to the question: “How many consultant MBBs does it take to bully a student with a question?”0May 9, 2005 at 4:16 pm #119179
That’s a fairly loaded question. There are numerous factors (X’s) that could influence whether or not you ‘catapult’ job levels (Y).
Just guessing, I would think that the outcome depends quite a bit on whether or not your company is doing Six Sigma. If so, then there will be many other factors to look at. If not, then there is a high probability that your completion of any SS training wouldn’t mean anything at all to your company.0May 5, 2005 at 5:55 pm #118990
“Money Belt”…specifically engineered for fighting gravity’s effects on the pants of the everyday bean-counter
iSixSigma magazine, May/June ’05 issue, page 80…0May 4, 2005 at 10:06 pm #118874
I have to agree with Mike Carnell. If you already have the data for why employees are leaving, then your ‘Quick Wins’ are to change those issues for the better.
I would add that you should use what is in your SS toolbox to validate the data you have and like Mike C. said, talk to the employees that you still have to ensure that the problems are still the same….that there hasn’t been a shift in the issues. Then use some of those same employees to brainstorm improvement ideas.
Good luck MikeS.0May 4, 2005 at 9:42 pm #118869
I think you are assuming that MikeS is talking about retention of BB employees. I doubt that would be enough to be a DMAIC project, unless you were at a very large company….or one with a very high percentage of BB employees.
MikeS- If you wish to have any type of accurate & detailed answers to your questions, then we need you to provide more specific info….0April 27, 2005 at 1:13 pm #118504
Please see Post #68966.0April 27, 2005 at 1:12 pm #118503
Please see Post #68966.0April 27, 2005 at 1:09 pm #118502
Reigle, Andy, & Stan:
One might take the time here and point out that in all of this “heated debate”, poor Tony remains hanging in the balance….yet to receive any substantial answers to his question.
Instead of spending all this time arguing trival points of history that cannot be changed, why doesn’t someone apply themselves and help Tony….he can still change the tasks in front of him.
This public forum will become virtually useless if no one can take the time to focus on the original question at hand.
My advice is that someone apply all this vast knowledge they are displaying to help people with that which lies in front of them…..not what remains 20 years behind us.0April 25, 2005 at 4:01 pm #118391
I would like to take a look at this Case Study. Please send it to: email@example.comApril 21, 2005 at 12:28 pm #118195
I was originally trained as a BB and held to work the projects part time at my old company.
I am now a full-time, dedicated BB working projects at my new company.
Speaking from experience, part-time project leaders (BB, MBB) will yield part-time buy-in, part-time support, and part-time results.
Full-time BBs & MBBs is the only way to go for sustained sucess.0March 28, 2005 at 9:57 pm #116933
I believe that your last question is the key to the Control phase of this project. We have to find the right way to both keep them connected & hold them accountable at the same time. Obviously, these behavioral changes now show a process capability that did not exist before.0March 28, 2005 at 9:52 pm #116932
Thanks for the post Dean. A cultural change is exactly what I am hoping for in every project, as this will eventually help to weed out the systemic problems that exist. The challenge now, is to find the right way to sustain these changes through both time & turnover.0March 11, 2005 at 4:06 pm #116284
Here is one more idea to add to the other replies so far. In a manufacturing plant, sometimes a lucrative GB project can be to look at spare parts consumption. The goal here is to find an either an area of high usage, or an area of increasing usage. Usually, the purchasing folks have some of the best data in a manufacturing facility.
An example would be finding a machine which consumes a lot of replacement parts due to mechanical wear, and eliminating the root cause of the wear. These projects are usually also good for replication across the facility. Usually the solution is quick, and the time is consumed finding the high-cost problem & it’s root cause.0March 11, 2005 at 3:58 pm #116282
Thanks for the post Mike. We are also in the Houston area, so of course I have an idea of what you are describing with the Cockroach Effect. I’m just not absolutely sure how the replacement name would go over with corporate management during an update presentation…never know.
Also, thanks for the example from a previous project. It is things like that which make this message board worthwhile.
I am also leaning on a new theory, that maybe the operators have started ‘giving a s*#t’ now that everyone else does. They are in a somewhat remote area of the facility, and I think they have felt somewhat neglected in the past. We just have to find a way to hold on to this.0March 10, 2005 at 1:48 pm #116218
I agree with the other posts that your description is not at the root of the problem, and that if it could be easily addressed by other tools then someone would have already done it. However, it is the team’s job to focus the project on the root causes…not the project selection committee.
I believe that your original question, which no one has addressed yet, has to do with project selection criteria. Every company uses different criteria, but there are some general standards: Financial Benefit, Customer Impact, Likelihood of Success, Facility/Company Impact, Safety/Environmental Impact, Strategic Fit, Resources Available, etc.
Just use categories like these to build a weighted decision matrix for scoring by the committee. You can use 1-5, 1-10, or 1-3-9 ratings…just whatever you prefer. You may also consider doing a short (1-2 hour) overview of SS for the committee, as there seems to be some lack of understanding on their part. Talk to your Champion 1st though, and make sure you have support for such an act.
Hope this helps.0September 1, 2004 at 7:34 pm #106702
I would recommend getting the team together and actually walking through/experiencing the process (if possible). Having multiple sets of eyes is a definate help as well as having people who are able to ask seemingly obvious questions because they are not familiar with the process (versus a Subject Matter Expert or Black Belt that may have some prior knowledge/put together the “as is” process map in the first place)
The team walkthrough not only helps validate the process map but enables everyone to get insight into the entire process – It can also be a good source to identify places where there may be rework loops/defects not captured on the process map and potentially help the team brainstorm input and/or process metrics.0July 9, 2004 at 8:57 am #56306
In terms of in house BB training what is the feel out in the market for BB’s who have gone through in house BB/MBB training with large corporations?
Jason0May 4, 2004 at 6:38 pm #99713
The Dept of Defense agency, Defense Finance and Accounting Service, is currently using and implementing Six Sigma methodologies in accordance with DoD’s transformation efforts.0March 30, 2004 at 5:05 pm #97591
I would appreciate a copy of your forecasting wizard. I have recently been assigned to improve our forecasting and have a real mess on my hands.
THANKS!0March 25, 2004 at 11:19 am #97353
I think Mman has crossed his limits by posting obusive language, and such people must be thrown out of forum, and this forum is seen by many professionals across the globe, and there are various sites available for people like Mman, and his associates. Thanks to Sathya and Kim for bringing it to light and dumping such articles.It is high time such messages must be reported as spam.0January 15, 2004 at 8:57 am #94233
§Autocorrelation refers to the correlation of a time series with its own past and future values such as weekly share prices or interest rates, and the same values at a fixed time interval later. Alternative term is “lagged correlation.
A lag of k is to move a times series a distance k forward
If the data exhibits a strong 12 month seasonal component, you take a difference at lag 12 in order to induce stationarity and look at the autocorrelation of the differenced series.0November 17, 2003 at 10:37 am #92587
The first step in Six Sigma is creating the need for a shift in organisational change.
Create a ‘Burning Platfrom’ that your business must address, Six Sigma is then the methodology for achieving your business goals.
Be prepared for total organisational change and the pain that is assiociated. If you have your burning plateform identified the pain will be more than worth it.0October 16, 2003 at 11:34 am #91113
I have just completed a project which was the result of a gut feel decision which did not work. Although not a process problem rather a peice part design problem it may be of some use.
We had been experiencing tool failures in the field on a cast tool head. The failures resulted in large warranty claims and put the product group under pressure to fix the breaking tools ASAP. The old heads in the tool design group decided in their experience that we needed to thicken up the cast to gain more materila strength. So we changed all of the tooling at a capital cost of £20,000. This change did not cure the problem at which point a six sigma project was raised.
To cut a long story short we ran through the DMAIC process and recomended a material change at no increased cost the different material cured the problem and we have not seen any failures on the new tools. If we have applied the DMAIC methodology in the first place we would have had the fix in place earlier and we would not have spent £20,000 in capital on unnecessary tooling costs!
Jason0October 9, 2003 at 12:33 pm #90815
It looks like you’ve got continuous/variable data collected as individual values, which would indicate that you should use the I-MR control chart. Be careful using the word “variance” like that though, just to be sure to avoid confusing it with the variance used in statistics.0October 9, 2003 at 7:20 am #90809
How is your warranty and reliability currently measured.
Do you measure by part number,failure hours and cost?
Is your failure data supplied by the OEM?
I don’t have a great deal of experience with this sort of requirement but I have used Weibull and know how powerfull it can be.0March 11, 2003 at 1:31 pm #83684October 4, 2002 at 7:10 pm #79482
Your best bet would be to look for a position that would support/work with the six sigma program. I got lucky and hired directly out of college with my ME into a position as a Black Belt because they needed someone to be the dedicated one at our location. Therefore they began putting me through training as soon as I started with them. Here we are putting all of our salaried employees through some sort of six sigma training, and it will be the ones who do well with the Green Belt projects that move on to work more with six sigma, if they choose.0May 24, 2002 at 1:09 pm #75744
When you say “read Deming, pgs 70-75”, what book of Deming’s is that ?0April 23, 2002 at 8:13 pm #74735
Think of the process as taking an entity from one location to another, and I want to know the time it takes. If I clearly define a start time and an end time, what is the need for an MSE? Also, considering the long time of the process, the time can be rounded to minutes. What is the need for a resolution calculation?
Jason0April 23, 2002 at 5:29 pm #74704
You are right on track. I have heard that argument. If this case is done, what is the only discrepancy? Start time and end time? Why not develop a standard operating procedure to handle operator differences? These are questions that I challenged BB and MBB with and have yet to hear a definitive answer. Is this method industry standard? Would love to entertain more ideas.
0December 6, 2001 at 2:07 pm #70400
I was a blackbelt for the first wave here. Here’s what I experienced. My first project was successful, but it took longer (1 year) than it should have. This partially stemmed from I was still learning, but also from the fact that we (the BB) were REQUIRED to work on hard dollar savings in our manufacturing facilities. By the way, I am in research engineering. The most important learning? Buy-in, buy-in, buy-in! I spent God knows how much time just trying to get information or cooperation from different parts of the company because they saw this as another TQM-system that would go away with time. This is actually getting better now. This is improving the success rate of the second wave significantly.
Probably one of our biggest deficiencies was our MBB. He was just another employee who went through MBB training in addition to BB training. He had never completed a project before the training classes and did not know any more than us. This resulted in form letter-type anwsers out of the Six Sigma manual rather than actual help when we had problem and issues.
My two cents worth – if you want to start a Six Sigma program, hire some outside people as MBB’s and higher. They may not know the business, but they understand the process. Combined with the BB’s business specific knowledge, you can get a lot farther, a lot quicker.0June 12, 2001 at 4:00 am #67005
Thank you for your reply.
Our concern lies in determining the ‘number of oportunities’ for failure.
The exact scenario is this.
We have approximately 500,000 wood poles in service. From time to time these break. Regulations specify a reliability rate of 99.99% PA = 50 failures PA.
But this is a yearly rate.
When we came to compare our failure rate the the six sigma model, it became apparent that the six sigma model was based on each item haveing only one opportunity to fail (at time of measurement of drift). If this is the case we need to meet approx 1 pole failure per year! 50 x reduction!
Our poles may fail this year, next year or the year after, providing many opportunities to fail. Does this mean that each pole has one opportunity of failure per year of it’s life (eg 60 years), because the unit of measure we are using is failures PER YEAR?
Another line of thought here was that all poles are inspected every 5 years on a rotational basis. Is this event the opportunity to fail?0