iSixSigma

Nick

Activity

  • C&E diagram…Ishikawai…Fishbone: The newer versions of Microsoft Visio also allow you to create/customize a nice looking Fishbone Diagram with relative ease. Minitab 16 allows you to create a fishbone but it is more tedious to use (not sure how user friendly Minitab’s QC3 makes creating the diagrams).

    C&E Matrix: I always use a…[Read more]

  • Well said Chris. With the increased capability of analytical software packages such as Minitab the learning curve of many of the statistical tools has gotten significantly faster. However, I really haven’t found […]

  • Hi @dublinkenneth. I think the first thing to do is quantify the number of times the customer wanted the product and you did not have it on the shelf. The cost of this “miss” is very clear – the product did not […] 7 years, 9 months ago

  • Not sure I completely understand your question – please provide more detail. However, I have seen some use a metric to show what percentage of the time a part is available and ready to ship to a customer when it is ordered (i.e. it is the % of the time that a customers order was filled from the warehouse shelf versus when it had to be ordered…[Read more]

  • Marc – you are correct in your understanding. Fix the measurement system before you do further analysis. One way to improve the measurement system might be to ensure that all underwriters are using the same method to assess the case. There are potentially other ways to improve the measurement system but I think would be a good place to start. 7…[Read more]

  • Please quantify “far from desirable”. A marginally adequate measurement system might allow a little different approach. However, without seeing the results of your R&R I would suggest that you improve the measurement system before you spend any time trying to diagnose/improve things with the process. If you cannot trust your measurement system…[Read more]

  • I agree with the approach outlined by @straydog and @cseider – you should further narrow the scope of your project to address specific reasons for calls.

    I would also further emphasize the point Chris made – not all calls are bad so be selective in ways that you attempt to reduce call volume. There may be a portion (maybe large / maybe…[Read more]

  • I understand the fundamental statement that, if the process stays the same, widening specification limits will increase the capability (i.e. the analogy that it is easier to park a car in a two car garage without scraping the sides than it is to park a one car garage). However, if the GRR is 45% then I’m not seeing how you can place enough trust…[Read more]

  • A customer contact management software package would be the best way – everything else is probably comparable to fixing it with duct tape and coat hangers (i.e. a cheap and temporary solution that might be okay right now but probably won’t stand the test of time)…

    If a customer calls you multiple times do they usually call from the same…[Read more]

  • I don’t have a good solution for you but it may be enough to spur your thoughts. Perhaps some others in this forum will be able to provide better ideas as well.

    I recently faced a similiar problem for phone calls (not emails). When the call center was unable to answer the call live they are required to respond to the voice message within a…[Read more]

  • My suggestion would be to work with the customer to set a spec limit. Control charts are one of many good tools to monitor the health and stability of a process but should not be confused with spec limits. Your process may be statistically in control but totally unusable for the customer. Also, I would be careful not to assume that batches…[Read more]

  • If feeding the parts is the bottle neck then perhaps you could consider changing how the parts arrive to the dunnage location… From a lean perspective you’ve describe two types of waste 1. Work in Progress (WIP) and 2. Transportation (moving from dunnage to workstation).

    For example, if parts tend to accumulate before this station then the…[Read more]

  • Sorry Colin but this doesn’t answer the transformation question however I think it could be relevant still. I 100% agree with the advice that the spec limits are not up to us – they should be set totally through the eyes of the customer and their requirements. Without knowing your specific industry I am only speculating but I think it is a…[Read more]

  • I see. I think it might be difficult, but not impossible, to compare the metrics one for one between the two. You would have to take a careful look at each metric before making the statement that one performs better than the other. If you are comparing a metric such as the number of issues resolved then you must normalize according to volume so…[Read more]

  • Pam,
    Can you clarify what you mean by moving? Are you talking about starting on chat and converting to phone call or simply having someone call instead of chat?

    I’m not sure if the volume difference is the big factor in determining if the comparison is logical. Using the appropriate statistical test should account for the differing sample…[Read more]

  • Are you looking to change how you measure the process’s performance (i.e. 5 overlaps and 10 total branhces) or how you grade the process’s performance based upon the taxonomy you’ve created (i.e. is 5/10 good, bad, or neither)? 9 years, 5 months ago

  • Please describe your situation in more detail – right now this sounds like a text book question. If it isn’t a textbook question it is too broad for any of us to answer. How do you measure these qualities today in your process? 9 years, 5 months ago

  • I would suggest doing a process walk to find some ideas (start where the product leaves the plant and work your way upstream). Depending on the level and emphasis put on scrap reduction and continuous improvement at your facility there may be a great many ‘low-hanging’ fruit or it might be tough to find any big dollar savings. I had the fortune…[Read more]

  • I think Robert is giving sound advice. The low frequency of defects makes this one tough to troubleshoot indeed. Depending on the amount of process data you have and your ability to trace a defective part to a specific date/time I would suggest going back and scrutinizing that (i.e. look for patterns in the process temps, raw material…[Read more]

  • You are correct – FTA is definitely better suited for analyzing what has gone wrong rather than thinking of ways something could go wrong.

    I don’t know any any rules of thumb that help you decide when an FMEA is necessary. In my experience it has been a judgment call that considers the investment (pre-work, maintenance, …) required to…[Read more]

  • Load More