iSixSigma

ASQ is damaging SS

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General ASQ is damaging SS

Viewing 64 posts - 1 through 64 (of 64 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #50170

    Stanly
    Member

    I believe that ASQ (for the sake of collecting money) is spoiling the image of SS certification ,just through giving the BB certificates upon passing the Exam.(with 2 fake projects).I know a person who jumped to the Eam. without any prior knowledge in SS and became CSSBB.I believe that going through the SS course should be a “MUST” for any SS-BB candidate (like VillanovaU.).I believe ASQ should stop this great nonsense as it spoils the image of SS world-wide>
    Just my opinion 

    0
    #172351

    Mikel
    Member

    I think it is all the crappy providers of SS training (like Villanova) that
    are damaging SS. Let’s stop all the training by fake MBB’s!I also agree that ASQ allowing certification on exam alone is wrong.
    All of their other certifications require a level of experience. Let’s do
    that.

    0
    #172354

    Ron
    Member

    Agreed!
    But almost impossible to do. just look at the addds this website:
     

    0
    #172355

    Speedy G
    Member

    You are completely confused.
    Villanova produces as many fake BB’s as anyone. The questions you have posted under various names substantiates that.
    ASQ created the need for Black Belts. If the CQE’s would have done the job that they were supposed to do after they passed the CQE exam there would never have been a need for Black Belts. Most CQE’s passed the test then sat on their pompous backsides and did what most so called quality professional do. Nothing.

    0
    #172358

    Mikel
    Member

    Amen brother.Now the fake GB and BB are doing the same.How to solve this problem?

    0
    #172359

    SiggySig
    Member

    Any idea how many “xxxx” is ruining Six Sigma threads there have been on this board? Too many to count.How about this – unless you got your cert in the 80’s or 90’s by one of the following companies, you are a phony (later Certs do not count since their programs have been “watered down” since then):GE
    Allied Signal
    Motorola
    Disclaimer: I am a fake BB as well, since I was not certified by any of these companies. I’ve only run a dozen BB projects, mentored about 50 green belt projects, totaling several million in top line and bottom line benefits.

    0
    #172360

    Brandon
    Participant

    There is no such thing as real or fake.
    One can either solve problems or not….utilizing any number of skill sets to do so.
    If you can solve problems you have value…if you can’t you don’t have value.

    0
    #172361

    TonyBo
    Member

    Problem is…we dont have an industry standard.  Ironic, the “Six Sigma community” has alot of variation in the certification requirements for its levels..(GB,BB, MBB)…!!

    0
    #172362

    Vallee
    Participant

    Voice of the customer: I want something quick, fast, and easy… and I’ll spend a lot of money to do it…. but do I really know what it takes to change?Voice of most business Six Sigma or Not: Speed, bottom line, and volume…. what validation?Voice of the new YB, GB, BB, MBB …fill in the blank___: Now that I have been trained (internally or externally to their company) what should I do? I can’t get support from management. The company is not ready to change.Overview: Commodities are nice if everyone can use it right. Many have forgotten who the user of six sigma tools are… no different than PDCA or TQM or TQC. So instead of complaining become a craftsman and be willing to help apprentices and get off the pot.HF Chris Vallee

    0
    #172364

    Umm Yeah
    Member

    Your just mad you didn’t pass the ASQ exam probably, get a life!  ASQ is the leading authority on Quality.  When you say they are producing fake BB’s, realize that when you come saying that, you are putting down your peers, who had determined this individual has sufficient knowledge to be certified as an ASQ CSSBB!

    0
    #172365

    GB
    Participant

    I’m going for more popcorn and Dr. Pepper…This thread has the potential to be ruinously entertaining!
    All it needs now is a reference to, or from Bonacorsi…

    0
    #172366

    Speedy G
    Member

    What a poncy responce.
    Passed the first time I took it and it meant nothing. Only took it so I wouldn’t have to listen to dribble like that.

    0
    #172367

    Speedy G
    Member

    You posted some time ago there were less than 10 good CQE’s so we must be seeing the same thing. Someone said mentored a lot of CQE’s.
    How would you fix it?

    0
    #172370

    Taylor
    Participant

    HBGB get two Dr Peppers please.
    The reason we dont have a certifying body is pretty simple. The mere foundation of Six Sigma, VOC, every company has different needs and different ideas about how they should go about training their employee’s or implementing six sigma. The problem I see is the experience lost when becoming certified by a University program such as Villanova. I just cant see the reasoning behind “Certification” without the real life curves and business pressure that exist.
    I think, we as quality and engineering management professionals have to learn how to see through the smoke, fog, and BS to recoginize, as Brandon stated, Can you run a project or not, that is the bottom line.

    0
    #172371

    Mikel
    Member

    Agree with Speedy – what a stupid response.I also passed on the first try with a single reference book and it took
    less than 2 hours. I can do the CQE quicker than that.

    0
    #172374

    Michael Mead
    Participant

    I also agree with Barndon. Some people can do it and others can’t, regardless of certification. ASQ is a worthy body of peers, promoting a certain level of exam-taking skill and (at least somewhat) verified project success. 
    There are many ways to approach solving quality problems, we all know the advantages of Six-Sigma, 1) Management Support, 2) Financial (something every manager understands) results. I am not sure a CSSBB is more qualified than a CQE, or whatever will be the “Next Big Thing”.
    Don’t blame ASQ for people who can not perform. Why is their program worse than others? Probably because someone has a bias toward one program or another.  
     

    0
    #172383

    Telcomate
    Member

    There are 3 aspects for the problem:
    1) Too simple and not practical certification program for people who are seeking quick paper to increase their pay. People were trained in theory and ideally stimulated projects which does not apply in real world application.
    2) Over polished and lie on the resume from the certification holders. People with basic or little practice experiences are putting up with made up projects, figures to cheat the recruiter. When they were hired, they could not perform as what it should be and thus ruinining the deployment of SS.
    3) Mass production of certifications decline the quality. The early SS deployment will pick up candidates with good potential/quality and further enhance their skills. And these picked up candidates were usually able to innovate, apply and develop something after their training. Current situation are; anyone who can pay the fees will be able to get trained and certify. The certifications holder are not longer exclusively selected to match the skill’s nature and many are not able to apply SS because they are not up to the level with abilities to fine tuning the tools to fit in the organization needs.
    A handful of companies in my region here were desperately looking for SS professionals. But it ends up batches after batches of certified SS professionals failing the projects and put the employer off the SS program.
     
     
     
     

    0
    #172384

    Stanly
    Member

    Because you are “Stan”,that is why?

    0
    #172385

    Stanly
    Member

    Well said

    0
    #172396

    Vallee
    Participant

    Michael,Blame does not apply to just one agency. We teach people a process and as the norm do no react or follow up on the validation that people can or can not perform. When you look at the questions of the recent GB who is actually attempting to lead the starting of a process improvement program… where in his and others teachings did the thorough method of implementation and influencing without authority get missed? Review this recent post and responses to see what we should be doing. https://www.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=139202Does that mean we should scan the students during the application to the program first… probably not, it would be business suicide. Maybe we follow up with students to see what they are missing and need help on to improve the teachings overall…. isn’t that a step in six sigma that we teach?HF Chris Vallee

    0
    #172400

    Yosemite Sam
    Member

    Thats because everyone else is stupid but you two are hardcore, tough, and just all around cool!  Like a duo of Six Sigma Super Hero’s.
    Hey Speedy G what airport are ya in? Traveling with Lebowski too?
    Yosemite Sam,CSSBB, CQE, PMP, Yoga Master, Stan Fan

    0
    #172402

    GB
    Participant

    I do blame ASQ and the other “mills”, for perpetuating the cycle of inept, yet “certified” GB’s and BB’s.   Having been in a position to hire 6S professionals, I interviewed many ASQ cert’d people that couldn’t cut it.    If an applicant came in with ASQ AND 6S experience from a recognized company or program, they fared much better.   The ASQ-only applicants didn’t do well.

    0
    #172416

    Stanly
    Member

    Agree
    Well said
    I still believe that the ASQ should respect its image and stop this nonsense for the sake of making money?

    0
    #172419

    Taylor
    Participant

    UH Stanly, thats what companies do is make money! Why should it be their fault someone can’t manage a project.

    0
    #172421

    Stanly
    Member

    This why ASQ should avoid such trap 

    0
    #172426

    Brandon
    Participant

    ASQ’s approach is the closest thing we have to any certification standard. Do we want a standard? If so, let’s support ASQ and get involved in changing the stds if we feeel they are inadequate.
    Look at any other certifications – they don’t mean someone is GOOD at anything, just that they have complied with some educational std.
    You think all Certified Financial Planners are competent? Of course not.
    Certification is a piece of paper. Nothing more….never will be anything more.

    0
    #172432

    Stanly
    Member

    Agree
    It is a piece of paper,but it could be misused through introducing huge amounts of fake consultants into the SS market ,specially in the third-world:India ,middle-east,etc.
    Again it should be stopped
    My opinion  

    0
    #172436

    Michael Mead
    Participant

    I wonder if those rantaing against the ASQ CSBB certification are not expressing “sour grapes”?  70% of those who take that test fail. I doubt that many from “India, middle-east, etc.” are those who are passing it. In fact, I wonder how many of us here could pass that exam?
    At an ISO 9000 conference many years ago, a panel of the consultants was asked what was needed to be a consultant. The answers ranged from “integrity” to “profound subject knowledge.” However, my answer was simpler…the one thing that you must have to be a consultant is merely someone who will pay you. That is it.
    In economics we pretend the market is efficient and screens out the incompetents. It is not totally true. But for those who have not, or could not pass the ASQ exam, yet became “certified” somewhere else, shall we say the “only true certification comes from ASQ?’ None of us have said that. It seems that some of us here are very centered on our own method of certification. Of course, all others are inferior.

    0
    #172439

    Vallee
    Participant

    Just for clarifcation. I am not selecting any particular company as being better or worse than the other.  My goal is to help people be successful which means ensuring that more of the key skills are taught and that there is some type of follow up.
     
    HF Chris Vallee

    0
    #172444

    Alchemist
    Participant

    Really very interesting discussion, it’s night 2am so I had enough time to read all posts and as all you real or fake, certified or not certified experienced or fresh BB/MBB are here, I have few queries and openions for all of you to add value
    1. Fault is not with ASQ or any other certifying agency because then one can blaim all university diplomas, degrees! Any certificate just say you passed the exam, you know the contents! and then comes real world which just need real experience! So fault lies with employers, who just on basis of certificate hire or expect one month turn-overs.
    2. ASQ did a good job by providing a world over known certification, which any experienced BB can clear easily if he is updated or may be not because he don’t need one! but with such foolish employers it may help beating the competetion if you are in race!
    QUERY: Should there be any Six Sigma excellence award kind of thing? At present there is no benchmark for progress made! millions or billions all say progress but against what standard! Secondly in my view, having such an award giving agency will help people like us who alone keep on teaching management that sixsigma means they need to change not the consultant.Such an agency will be able to rate consultant in real terms not on just exam and by rating on all points for a six sigma organization will be able to give management also a feedback which will again help worthy of us!
    regards (Since 2000 into SS, not ASQ certified)
     

    0
    #172446

    Stanly
    Member

    Great Opinion
    May I ask:Why not certified from the ASQ?
    Thanks

    0
    #172448

    Fake Consultant
    Participant

    Outstanding
    But still far away fromthe real question>
    I believe that ASQ should ask the candidates to go through a certain SS Course before applying for the Exam.
    I wish to read the comments of other experts in this regad 

    0
    #172450

    RickL
    Member

    I think its time for us to re-evaluate the current situation for Six Sigma.We need to continuously improve Six Sigma as well.The complexity in the industries are making apply Six Sigma more challenging.My personal opinion is many of our current training courses content and certifications need to upgrade to produce people who are able to apply things under different situation not just only follow the theoretical or ideally designed projects and stucked when they found the real life project is not as similar to what they have learned through courses and certification.I have worked with various industries and found that the quality of Six Sigma certification holders are really declining in many companies. The ability to apply and select right project are lacked in many certification holder and companies who hire inappropriate people made things go worse and it continue to passing failures to other organizations who trying to apply Six Sigma.Perhaps some senior practitioners here can help to form some new structure for the certification. I believe in this forum we have a lot of real master who can help to suggest what is needed to be a real GB/BB/MBB.We cant stop other cert selling companies to damage the SS reputation but we can start to form something which can help the really interested people to be capable as they should be.Is that feasible for us to have few reputable MBB to form some organization like the one for CFA or PMP?

    0
    #172451

    Fake Consultant
    Participant

    Great Suggestion
    I’m still waiting to read some more opinions,including the Mike Carnel
    point of view 

    0
    #172453

    Michael Mead
    Participant

    Well, I guess this will be my final comment on this thread. First, I am an ASQ certified SSBB. I also have 5 other ASQ certifications.  I am a believer in the ASQ method of certification. 
    The ASQ exam relies on a body of knowledge gleaned from practitioners within ASQ. The certification requires 2 projects as well as a test of theretical knowledge. A combination of 8 years of work experience or university study is also needed.
    The certification is constantly evolving as the questions are changed on every exam cycle to reflect the changes in the theory and practice.  I believe ASQ would entertain any ideas that would promote the professionalism of the field without limiting access by qualified technologists.
    I, for one, do not favor requiring a “course”. I think in my case it would have been money wasted (and the courses are not cheap). If we had always required a course, who would have certified the first black belt? Our profession is constantly evolving, new tools are added, others fall out of favor, but quality improvement, whether named Six Sigma, or something else follows what I learned in the sixth grade. There it was called the scientific method.  Some people are able to synthesize data from various sources and bring it to bear on problems. I would hate to keep these people from becoming Six-Sigma Certified because they did not attend a specific course.    
    The advantages of six-sigma methodolgy over others are management related, managament support is built into the organization and couching results in monetary terms speaks a language that all managers understand. As long as this is part of Six-Sigma, we are a unique breed.
    For those who favor a universal certification, I suggest coming over here to China, where the government gives the exams. I have not met any “fakes” here, but I have maet many who could not calculate their way out of a paper bag, unless they memorized the formula. 
    The ASQ tries to be the final word on quality in the US (the world). Yet, I am constantly reminded of self-serving institutions whose course “is much better” than the others. I was on a committee once at a major university where the statistics department refused to accept credit from outside the university to apply as a basic statistics course in the quality program. I guess the professors there knew a lot more that the professors from elsewhere. As long as we live in the market-driven US of A, I am afraid this debate will not be settled.

    0
    #172455

    Speedy G
    Member

    Close but no cigar.

    0
    #172458

    Sorour
    Participant

    I am just wondeirng about the role played by ASQ in the field of Quality. Has it helped American corporations gain competitive advantage through better quality. Any comments?

    0
    #172459

    Mikel
    Member

    Yes

    0
    #172467

    RickL
    Member

    I think ASQ qualification is a not problem. At least it ensure the holder can basic knowledge of SS. What i think that we need was having some improved system to help to identify those who can “apply” things rather than just remember formula and could not do anything if the situation changed out of their packaged knowledge. For internal certification, situation could still be better because BB should have gone through applications before they got the credit so what we need to include will be the external certification.
    The spreading of SS methodology are faster than 5 years ago and the industries applying it are also increasing in a vast speed. However, the level of the external certifications seems could not catch up with the market needs. There were pretty lot of projects failures and “certified” BB were dropped out in my region lately. Companies start to lost faith on six sigma.
    I would not mind we are producing 1000 or 2000 certified people every day. But if majority of these people could not apply things out of the bag then we should not hear the term “six sigma” in 10 years or even less time. Remember the dilemma in Process re-engineering ? we dont hear it much nowadays.
    Perhaps we should look at it in a six sigma way. Current situation is we are having a pool of certificated people in the world. So how should we define which type of quality the industry want to see from these people with relevant capability to produce the desired output that the industry expected.We can either have : upgraded appraisal system from ASQ or we have another body who will be governing the application abilities of the ceritification holder.
    It could be a six sigma project which help to improve six sigma creditbility and capability.

    0
    #172470

    Fake Consultant
    Participant

    Excellent opinin
    This why ASQ should cancel this on-line certification

    0
    #172493

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Fake Consultant,
    My apologies for the late response.
    I agree to some extent with Rick^L (I think I got the name correct – previous post). The certifications need to change but I am not really sure in what way. We only do deployments so anyone we certify has to do projects. Interestingly enough the companies we have been working with recently require 3 completed projects where we have always required 2 so they are actually making the requirements more difficult.
    At the risk of making this a long winded post (just for Steveo’s sake) you need to remember where this started. The original certifications were from deployments so there was no issue with completing projects. There was also the fact as a part of the deployment it wasn’t just about completing a project but there was the dynamic of transforming an organization mixed with it. Once Allied and GE drove the popularity of Six Sigma the certified Black Belts were in demand. as in any market when there is a shortage someone will fill the void and we began to get the certification that were not attached to a deployment. Without the projects the supply of Black Belts was pretty much bimodal and the market seemed to make that distinction pretty easily so you have programs evolve such as the Villanova program. I can’t tell you if that is good or bad since we won’t hire anyone without deployment experience.
    At the risk of being redundant, there is a model in the book “The Deviant’s Advantage” that shows how ideas move from the Edge to Social Convention. Six Sigma fits the model almost perfectly. Per the model, one thing that happens is that original content is lost. We have seen this repeatedly as courses have been developed for transactions, service, small/midsize companies, healthcare, etc. and they all have some reason they need to eliminate tools. Part of the reason that happens is because people use DMAIC to teach tools rather than using the tools to teach DMAIC. We have a lot of tool experts because they understand what they consider the “technical” side of Six Sigma when in fact the “technical” side of Six Sigma is being able to drive results from the tools through people.
    As far as a single certification body goes I don’t see it happening. It has been tried repeatedly and more often than not it is by a person or company that sees the profit and power potential in being the final voice in who gets certified and who does not. As odd as the market has become I am not sure it isn’t better off allowing it to run as it does before you allow a person to have that stamp. If you remember back to the days of Jim Baker that story can get more bizarre than any of us want to deal with and that will kill Six Sigma in a heartbeat.
    At this point it is more of an issue of buyer beware. If you knowingly go out into an unregulated maket and you have not done a reasonable level of due dilligence then that is really your issue. I also am not sure that the current mix of quality of Black Belts isn’t what the market wants. There are organizations that are serious about improvement and take the time to find good people. There are also organizations that want to do Six Sigma for window dressing and want a Black Belt that they can put a bow tie on and stand them in the window. The current training market creates both. If you have a single body doing certification you end up with a Big Mac. Doesn’t matter much when or where they come from it all tastes the same because the trainers will eventually train to the mediocre standard (the standard will get negotiated so it will gravitate to some mediocre level).
    As far as the comment that the only issue is “Can you run a project?” I couldn’t agree less. People gointo the market looking for a Black Belt for a reason. Maybe they want to be “Just Like Jack” or maybe they are serious. If you don’t want to get certified then advertise yourself as “a person who can run projects and get results.” I haven’t looked in the want adds in a while but I doubt there is a market for that qualification. There is a market for a Black Belt.
    I probably didn’t help this string much.
    My hiring hierachy would be:
    1. Certified, multiple projects, multiple deployments
    2. Certified, multiple projects, single deployment
    3. Certified, no projects
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #172495

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Paul,
    That is really a two part question. I am assuming by American you mean US rather than North or South American (we are all Americans). ASQ has helped with quality. Regardless of how we debate it the end result is that they have been instrumental in awareness and training.
    Gaining a competitive advantage? That would be an organizations issue not ASQ’s.
    Just my opinion

    0
    #172496

    Taylor
    Participant

    Mike-I agree, right up to the point where you continue to use “certified”. There is no such thing. You are either “Trained” with Experience or “Trained” with Limited or no experience.

    0
    #172500

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Chad Vader,
    As long as they are carrying a certificate then someone called them certified. For me the certificate generally means they did some type of training. As long as we get to make a hiring decision I won’t get into a discussion with them about what their preference of terminology is. No real point. If we aren’t hiring for ourselves or interviewing for a customer then I don’t care what they call themselves.
    Catagory 3 isn’t a normal consideration. Our preference has always been Catagory 1 because they have been around the block a few times. Currently everyone (employee or contractor) is from Motorola, Allied, GenCorp or GE or a combination except one. So they all have long track records and can stand alone in most situations.
    These are preferences not a rules. You run into a fair number of people at conferences that have funded their own training in one form or another and they deserve some consideration in terms of personal initiative.
    Just my opinion. 

    0
    #172502

    Taylor
    Participant

    Mike
    OK agree the symantics of the name is frivilous. The point myself and some of the others where trying to make about “Can you run a project or not” is we see so many Certified/Trained black belts these days that cannot perform the duties “WE” require. And this seems to be a common theme among a whole bunch of us. Yes agree and this goes back to my original post, that VOC, is why there is no central certifying body, Each company has different needs as you pointed out yourself. It is also obvious you demand some experience in your criteria as well, based on this “Our preference has always been Catagory 1 because they have been around the block a few times. Currently everyone (employee or contractor) is from Motorola, Allied, GenCorp or GE or a combination except one. So they all have long track records and can stand alone in most situations.”  Window dressing will only get you so far, sooner or later someone is going to call you out, because you cant stand alone in a situation.
    Thanks for the reply, as always you make excellent points

    0
    #172503

    Vallee
    Participant

    Mike and Chad,Agreed that VOC and profit to answer the supply demand of VOC has driven us where we are today… which is why I added VOC to the post title a few posts ago. Also agree that just like a tech school, the more general the training gets, the less the trainees are ready to handle company specific issues….This is where the training should go and it needs to help teach people what steps need to happen in order to understand specific company demands. Probably should be in fine print that companies sending students to certain institutions will have to take a responsibility role when the students or new hires come in. Colleges and Tech Schools are no different in mass training but if you have not noticed yet, more schools are tying in with the outside businesses to see what the VOC is and are adapting.. should be no different here. By the way Mike, I’m off to the UK now for 2 weeks and would still like to get together when schedules match for that table talk discussion.

    0
    #172504

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Chad Vader,
    I think we are saying the same thing and I understand your VOC comment much better. Thank you. 
    We have to have experience to get the job done. Most of our business is repeat business so our customers have an expectation. They don’t expect multiple instructors in a room, they don’t expect multiple people in a location for site support, etc. so the model is built around a pretty self reliant type person (PI profile is predominately Highest A, Low C and Average D – B doesn’t seem to affect performance but the High B’s talk so much they drive you nuts). Maybe they don’t know the answer to everything but they can get it figured out (that is the High A – confidence in self). Gary Cone has written some stuff on the blog site about this and I think his company offers the service (we don’t sell PI).
    Unfortunately there is also a market for window dressing. That is something we as an industry are going to have to live with. If there wasn’t a market for it nobody would be training/certifying those people.
    There is a danger in “can you run a project or not” as well. That is why I prefer people with a multiple deployment background. If you were to come from some company that had a very strong CEO and an imbedded change process and that were the only place you had worked or if you were in a factory and were 4th generation (this guy was actually very good outside the factory) you might find yourself in an interesting situation when you get in an environment where resistance to change is tolerated.
    I am not sure there is much difference in the BB market and the ISO certification market. Take a serious look at your supply base if you require ISO certification and tell me you honestly believe they are all equal capability.
    The auditors they send out are in the same situation. The last place I took a company through certification was an electronics contract manufacturer and the two auditors that showed up – one had been a chemist for pyramid-selling-plan-soap-company and the other was getting his masters degree and had never had a full time job – no manufacturing experience. Most of the audit was “Wow and what does this machine do?” This stuff isn’t indigenous to Six Sigma it is just the way it seems to work right now.
    The up side? The market for reworking failed deployments seems to be getting bigger. Management is easier to work with and the employees are more difficult to work with.
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #172505

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Chris,
    That was that point to the article I wrote about Six Sigma Mambo. There are these recipe training companies that teach Six Sigma the way dance schools teach dance. Count the steps. They don’t know why they are doing it. It is just – 1 and 2 and 3 and 4. Tool zombies.
    When you link the tools back to the DMAIC phases and what is happening in that phase they learn a thought process. Intuitively understanding that process is what makes a difference in terms of getting to a solution. Driving results is a different set of skills (the probability of success goes down if they drink herbal tea).
    Just my opinion.
    Sorry about not getting the last call done. Entirely my fault. Things got a little out of control. I get back to the US on the 14th and will be traveling the following week. I will be with another person who would be interesting in this discussion. Let me know when you are available.
    This thread is like Part II of the one where we intended to have the call.

    0
    #172517

    RickL
    Member

    That is pretty much a 2 side issue, the recruiting companies and the candidates itself.
    Problems come from both side.
    1)Companies want immidiate success so they designed their requirements into wrong direction. I have observed many recent hiring companies started to lean toward industrial experiences rather than deployment experiences. Experiences in deploy SS in industry A is not regconise in industry B. When industry B want to do the hiring, they only look at people in the same industry eventhough there is no successful deployment in that industry yet. They are willing to settle with the candidate in same industry but with lower depolyment experiences as they neglected deployment experiences in multiple industry will build quick and good process mastery skills.
    2)Candidates want a quick rise in income but do not want to go through the comprehensive effort in picking up the skills. So, some simpler and easier courses appear for this demand. People just want to study book and get the certs are flooding the market.Worse scenario comes when people are putting up with made up projects. I have seen candidates who got the cert in 2006 claiming they have 8 years experiences in doing SS projects. And ironically that industry only start to apply SS in the last 2 years.
    since SS is getting quite a lot of publicity these few years, many companies are earger to pick up but current SS organizations are seems to be having gap to pick up with the needs. Traditionally, people from GE, Honeywell, Motorola are hot cakes but the speeding up turn over rate reduced the experiences of the people in the market.And also, these candidates are still not enough to meet the market needs
    ASQ then become another way to value the competency. However, problems come when the complexity on deployment increased with more and more indsutries apply SS in more functions. The tool box need to be upgrade and the application ability are also seems to be neglected for the theoritical knowledges.
    I think it is just like awarding driving license to the people who just passed the writing test. Some people may drive after that and many not. Thus the road accidents(failure) increased.
    Time to think about how to keep our drivers(SS practioners) up to the level or we will get this good methodology exploited……
     

    0
    #172530

    Taylor
    Participant

    Mike I totally agree on every point, including the ISO vs BB.
    You know its amazing these days, I’ve been involved with some pretty serious certification audits in the past, one of the most complicated was an AGA certification. Now its so water downed if you can pay the price of admission and have anything that resembles a procedure, your in.

    0
    #172567

    Alchemist
    Participant

    Your welcome Stanly!!
    Frankly speaking I din’t find the need to get certificate for testing self
    I was satisfied with the number of change agents I created ,who believe and live the philosophy, and the results brought for organization, I work with!
    But then standing in market if one see with all reality, certified people(with or without real world experience of change) have the edge, atleast on job hunter’s first screening of auto search!
    So I decided to get certificate and there I landed in no doubt ASQ created an image, like good university names which is helping rightly to certify content known or scope of knowledge for the candidate!
    But i will again say if there is any distruction of Six Sigma, that is being done by employers or businesses, which someone rightly said on this forum, doing Six Sigma for window dressing! These window dressers are neglecting the worthy person by just valuing certificate because anyway they dont need real change and for decoration what’s better than certificate?
    Thats why I voiced my openion if there is step by step excellence award for Six Sigma deployment by one internation body like, lets say ASQ only, it will reduce window dressers and fake BB/MBB also(with or without certificates) becuase it will not test the BB but it will check business so either the business will hire real BB or just will stay out of Six Sigma
    regards

    0
    #172587

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Chad Vader,
    Just trying to catch up.
    I think what we are seeing on certifications regardless if it is certification of individuals or organizations is the life cycle that Watts Wacker is describing in his book. It is the circle of life Simba.
    Motorola has gone through several cycles of re-birthing Six Sigma and considering some of the midwives it has had to withstand that is pretty understandable. There is the constant question of “is Six Sigma dieing?” If people really believe it is to be engrained into the culture all the arm waving that goes on around a project early in a deployment should fade to some extent. If something is truely engrained and it does become “the way we work.” then why should it become a corporate event to launch a project?
    We can create some central certification body and watch this thing fade to mediocrity and we will find some person on some desert island will start Variation University and start pumping out degrees in Six Sigma. Money does make people predictable.
    Just my opinion

    0
    #172596

    Taylor
    Participant

    Mike Carnell
    I went through a deployment with Tyco about 7 years back and the training and the mentoring of the project was the best I have been involved with. Once the projects started the VP in charge of the operation was relentless with the project presentations and it became a standard Joke around the office that even the 80-20 rule applied to the project itself, work on the project 20% of the time and the presentation 80% time. So it didn’t take long before everyone kind of hated do it. But to the same degree, everyone knew what was expected and the facts better be straight, there was no cutting corners. As a follow up with my old boss recently I learned that only a small group are continuing to process SS projects, while in the beginning all that where trained had to. So the life cycle has matured, in my opinion, or at least reached a level of “the low hanging fruit is gone”.
    I don’t think there should be a certifying body, PERIOD. It will as you state create mediocrity. And some programs are already so watered down that the real intent of Six Sigma has been lost.
    The first time I heard of Six Sigma was my Junior year in college, and it was funny because the instructor made a joke about how this is only the stuff engineers have been doing for years, and someone figured out a way to market it, but he did say that it will be here forever, or as he put it “Until someone can figure out how to break down the last sigma”. I really didn’t know what he meant that day, but the words are pretty true today.
    “Variation University” is that a subsidiary of Villinova? I like the name, maybe Stevo can be the mascot.
     

    0
    #172632

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Chad Vader,
    I am not sure if having it fade isn’t the right thing to do. If a company is still doing DMAIC projects 15 – 20 years from now that probably means they still have a crap product development process. In the beginning both make sense but one should start starving the other. It is like having short term memory loss. Ultimately it has to impact the long term memory.
    If you take the comment “the low hanging fruit is gone” and match it up with the professor (less Mary Ann) “this is only the stuff engineers have been doing for years, and someone figured out a way to market it” and if the professor were correct then there should not have been low hanging fruit. It will true forever but not sure it will be here forever. As the Buffett song goes “Only time will tell.”
    I think my first stats professor was probably more indicative of the state of business. I actually enjoyed my first stats class and asked him what I could do with it. His enlightened response “Nothing” At that point I just passed the class and moved on. I wasn’t to disappointed to see it pop up later.
    I am sticking with you on no certification. The market is driving the variation let the market sort it out.
    If the VU campus is on some deserted desert island it is sounding pretty good. Being on a deserted desert island with Stevo isn’t a pretty picture. I am just thankful you decided on mascot and not cheerleader. Those could be some pretty disturbing mental images.
    Regards

    0
    #172640

    Jeff
    Participant

    I’m a technical writer and have been for over 15 years. For 10 of those years I had no college degree. The day after I graduated at the ripe old age of 31 I was offered a career transition position in my company with a salary $15, 000 more than I was making. Was I better tech writer because I graduated? NO. But it looks good for companies to have educated people. The same with SS. It looks good for companies to have certified GBs and BBs, and some, like mine, are willing to pay more for those people. Right or wrong, some companies view certs as being valuable, and my salary will go up $3000 if I pass ASQ’s GB cert test tomorrow. The cert/no-cert argument is purely academic. If companies want to pay for the paper, people will keep getting the paper. That’s business. Oh, I should mention that I used to work at GE and have done numerous projects, even led 4 BB projects that saved a huge chunk of cash, which was documented. But my current company doesn’t care about experience, they want the paper so they can say that we have a certified Six Sigma person on staff. And I have to do GB then BB, just to make it look even better. I wonder if I’ll know more after the test than I do now…

    0
    #172642

    Six Sigma Tom
    Member

    Disclaimer: I am a Fellow of ASQ. I believe that ASQ long ago became a commercial enterprise, albeit one that gets not-for-profit tax and postage rate advantages and member dues. Like all commercial enterprises, ASQ tries to limit the effectiveness of its competitors. Due to their not-for-profit status, they have a competitive advantage. To the extent that this limits what is offered to the quality community, it does harm. On the other hand, ASQ does provide products and services to the quality community. In this respect, they do good. The net effect? Hard to say. It’s certainly not all good. But I’d say overall there is a positive benfit to ASQ’s being in existence.

    0
    #172645

    Stevo
    Member

    Chad,
     
    Depends on how long you are stuck on the island.  Over time, I start looking better.  Ask my wife.
     
    Stevo
     
    25 years                                               ——-
    20 years                                   ———
    15 years                              ——
    10 years                       ——-             
    5 years                  ——-
    1 year               —–
                            Bad      OK      Nice     Yummy

    0
    #172646

    Frank Orego
    Participant

    Let’s take a step back.  I am a big picture CPI professional.  I have experience in TOC (CCPM, Throughput accounting, Thining Process, etc.) and am an ASQ certified BB, and a PMI certified PMP.
     
    Big picture again:  Certification is just a stamp that you can take a test.  College degrees are just a stamp that you can take a test,  we can say this about any type of “certification”.
     
    If the  “Certified person can do the job successfully that is ALL that matters.
     
    We live in a society that wants people to prove their worth on paper.  In reality this is BS.  The work you actually perform on the ground is what matters.  What you contribute to the future is what matters!!!

    0
    #172648

    Brandon
    Participant

    Frank, I agree. Here’s my post in this string; about 1/3 of the way down:
    “There is no such thing as real or fake.
    One can either solve problems or not….utilizing any number of skill sets to do so.
    If you can solve problems you have value…if you can’t you don’t have value.”

    0
    #172650

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Good luck. I hope you do well.
    Regards

    0
    #172651

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    I can’t believe you put that much effort into that answer.
    Your head is definately wired different than the average person.
    Regards

    0
    #172660

    ATI
    Participant

    Well said

    0
    #172662

    Stanly
    Member

    I believe that some one from the ASQ should pay some attention and try to read all those VA remarks and comments to improve the performance of ASQ in this regard or they may apply the concept of “who cares??” as they have enough customers and good income>>>>

    0
    #172678

    Taylor
    Participant

    Stevo, cant believe I missed this Friday, but looks to me like your graph is a little too normal, Maybe we can perform a sigma shift and have something a little more realistic,
    and I agree with Mike, you are Wired alot different than most

    0
Viewing 64 posts - 1 through 64 (of 64 total)

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