iSixSigma

3-Legged 5-Y question

Six Sigma – iSixSigma › Forums › Old Forums › General › 3-Legged 5-Y question

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 6, 2004 at 8:04 pm #37122

    kbrady
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    I have client I am working with who uses a 3-legged 5-Y system. I am not familiar with this system if someone could enlighten me or point me toward a resource. Thank you!

    0
    October 7, 2004 at 12:54 am #108647

    Savage
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Let me point you to your client.
    Or are you worried your client might find out that you don’t know everything?  It’s ok, nobody knows everything – not even consultants.

    0
    October 7, 2004 at 3:06 am #108651

    O’Connell
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    QCD, Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? not achieving targets.

    0
    October 7, 2004 at 6:24 am #108655

    Mike Carnell
    ★ 20 Years ★
    Participant

    Matt,
    That was a pretty tacky response.
    If you consider that the 5-Y tool was effective and so simple that nobody made much money in marketing it there is a very high probability that the 3 legged species was invented by a consultant in order to add enough “complexity” (a freshly planted buzz word being attached to SS so that that individual can spin it a little faster) so there is a little more money to be gleaned from it.
    Good luck.

    0
    October 7, 2004 at 12:37 pm #108667

    Mikel
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Member

    Sounds like BS to me. But since they are your customer, you may want them to give you some reference materials on it.

    0
    October 7, 2004 at 12:57 pm #108671

    kbrady
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Thanks everyone – I have looked high and low for info on the subject to no avail. That is fine – from what I understand from what the company has told me said it is a small part of the PPAP process. Appreciate everyones feedback.

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 7:48 pm #108773

    Nahas
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    I used one with a client once. It was just a variation of the standard 5-Why root cause tool. Ask “Why” in 3 different categories to get at the root cause(s). So there would be 3 paths and 3 “root” causes. One might be equipment-related, one procedural, and one product related. Anyway, this might be what they are referring to. 

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 7:59 pm #108776

    kbrady
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Onahas,
    Thank you very much for your help – I did finally receive some information from the client company. I appreciate your added information. Kbrady

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 8:05 pm #108778

    mjones
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Kbrady-
    I just gotta ask: So, what is this 3-legged 5-Y thing after all?
    [And I’m betting Carnell and Stan nailed it… again…]

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 8:25 pm #108781

    kbrady
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    onahas actually was the one that enlightened me a little more see below.

    I used one with a client once. It was just a variation of the standard 5-Why root cause tool. Ask “Why” in 3 different categories to get at the root cause(s). So there would be 3 paths and 3 “root” causes. One might be equipment-related, one procedural, and one product related. Anyway, this might be what they are referring to. 

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 8:34 pm #108783

    mjones
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Thanks.
    I saw his response, but I wondered if this is what your client was after or if there was something else out there.
    And, what next? Coming soon from a consultant near you: the 5-why, 6-legged tool, to address the six basic sources of variation! 
    Cheers, have a great weekend.

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 9:12 pm #108786

    Savage
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Of course you’d think it was tacky (having done consulting yourself) – but I was right.   He didn’t know what it was and wanted to come across as if he did.  But he went to his client and asked.   Now we all know.

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 9:51 pm #108789

    Mike Carnell
    ★ 20 Years ★
    Participant

    Matt,
    I am back in consulting again but I don’t take it personally. Nothing worse than a sensitive consultant (unless of course you want to discuss 360 reviews).
    Regards 

    0
    October 8, 2004 at 10:23 pm #108790

    Dr. Scott
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

     Mike,
    You haven’t changed a bit! Good for you.
    But I would be happy to discuss the value of 360s.(little as it may be) if you wish. To say they are not of value is to say “I do not care what others think”. Not a good position to take if you want to be effective.
    Dr. Scott

    0
    October 10, 2004 at 3:35 pm #108816

    Mike Carnell
    ★ 20 Years ★
    Participant

    Doc,
    When it comes to 360’s I do care aparticularly if they try to use them on Belts.
    From the SS perspective a 360 is a measurement system – a critical one because if it is a flawed measurement system it will affect peoples behavior. Since it is a measurement system it should be able to stand up under MSA (lets not even do all 5 catagories – lets just do accuracy, repeatability and better yet reproducibility). It is like every other attribute system it is extremely inaccurate particularly when applied as carelessly as it typically is.
    Welch spent a tremendous amount of time making sure he had the right people doing the right job. Check out “Straight from the gut” and see what he thinks about it.
    The bad position is continuing to push a measurement system that emasculates people, with regards to doing their job, because the local HR person likes to be part of the cool group that has implemented 360’s regardless of the effect on the organization and is completely ignorant of mesurement system validation (the same group that is frequently trying to figure out how SS applies to their job – interesting paradox – it applies to a major portion of their job).
    Think about the guys you had in the Indiana plant trying to drive SS. There were some of those good old boys that would have driven a stake through their heart if you gave them a 360 and were the belts wrong? Just doing what we asked (trained) them to do. It is a flwed system and absolutely fatal to belts.
    Just my opinion.
    Regards

    0
    October 10, 2004 at 9:51 pm #108822

    Dr. Scott
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Mike,
    I certainly understand, and agree, with the points you make. However, if I did not say it before, let me say it again:
    360s should only be used to give “feedback” to the BBs. Not to evaluate their performance. I am not NEARLY as concerned whether the people around the BB like them as I am the BB improves the critical and verified performance metrics they have been assigned to.
    I only think a 360 can point out some flaws in their approach to doing the right thing if properly used by HR.
    Doc

    0
    October 11, 2004 at 12:46 pm #108856

    Mike Carnll
    ★ 10 Years ★
    Participant

    Doc,
    Ok. (That just means I understand what you said)
    Regards,
    Mike

    0
  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)

The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.