iSixSigma

Certification

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Certification

This topic contains 32 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by  SSDude 13 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 33 posts - 1 through 33 (of 33 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #42173

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Ok All,
    I have seen way too many questions here, and outside of here, regarding “Six Sigma Certification”.
    Can all of us answer the following questions?

    What are the standards for being Six Sigma Certified (MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.)?

    Who is(are) the certifying organization(s)?

     If there is no certifying organization, then whose “certification” is or is not acceptable?

    Ifyou an MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.? If so, how do you know?
    To start the responses, I will give mine after this post. But I am much more concerned with hearing from all of you.
     
    Thanks,
     
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #132996

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    What are the standards for being Six Sigma Certified (MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.)?
    They vary by each person you ask, and by those that ask you.

    Who is(are) the certifying organization(s)?
    There are none. Isn’t that a problem when so many are hung up on certification?

     If there is no certifying organization, then whose “certification” is or is not acceptable?
    Good question. Some like Motorola, Caterpillar, GE, etc. But what are their standards? And do they agree?

    If you an MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.? If so, how do you know?
    Cause I have a proven success of making good numbers go up, and bad numbers go down. And I have the proven ability to develop others to do so.
     
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #132998

    Jered Horn
    Participant

    You know…I think the only reason I have ever referred to myself as “certified” is because I have an impressive looking plaque (actually, I now have 2) signed by a CEO and a Master Black Belt that says so.
    Now, I use the Six Sigma Black Belt title because that’s what I do.  I believe it’s the title, not the certification, that holds value.  And it takes experience and results to increase that value.
    Certification standards…those really need to be set by individual employeers.  How many times have we read on this forum (from actual hiring authorities) that certain companies discard applicants with XYZ certifications because they know ABC is not required?  Without dragging this out too much, I think my point here is there is always going to be variation in the required/needed standards.  I’m not sure that even Six Sigma can make standards set by LMN Corporation equal to standards set by OPQ Corporation.  And I don’t see the need to attempt to regulate these standards…I think the weaker certification providers will eventually loose in the capitalism game.
    Am I concerned that the Six Sigma “movement” will fade away in time because of these varying certification standards?  NO!  Perhaps that’s just because I’m an optimist.
    Just my thoughts.

    0
    #132999

    Mr IAM
    Participant

    What are the standards for being Six Sigma Certified (MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.) – There are no over arching standards.

    Who is(are) the certifying organization(s)? – Any company that wants to plus all of the consulting links to your right.  Hek, I could certify you if you like?

     If there is no certifying organization, then whose “certification” is or is not acceptable? – All are acceptable.

    Ifyou an MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.? If so, how do you know? – Because you have one of those titles on your business card.
    The certification gets you an invitation to the dance (i.e..job interview) But, it doesn’t prove you can dance (use the tools and complete projects and increase revenue / reduce costs).

    0
    #133000

    Horticulture
    Participant

    What are the standards for being Six Sigma Certified (MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.) –
    Depends on the organization. Ranks are relative to the level of knowledge & activity within the organization.
    Who is(are) the certifying organization(s)? –
    ASQ which is starting to look like the most widely recognized and well respected(?)
    If there is no certifying organization, then whose “certification” is, or is not acceptable? –
    All are acceptable (to different people). You just have to defend that all the effort and time you spent in getting the cert. was worthwhile.
    If you are an MBB, BB, GB, YB how do you know? –

    Because you have one of those titles on your business card and act    in that capacity in your organization.

    0
    #133002

    Stan’s Man
    Member

    What are the standards for being Six Sigma Certified (MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.)?  Whatever Stan says
     
    Who is(are) the certifying organization(s)?  Stan’s House of Quality and Liquor Store
     
    If there is no certifying organization, then whose “certification” is or is not acceptable?  Stan’s is widely accepted at most companies plus countless bars and Canadian Ballet establishments
     
    If you are an MBB, BB, GB, YB, etc.? If so, how do you know?  Cause Stan tells me so.
     
     

    0
    #133014

    Darth
    Participant

    1.  Varies from organization to organization but there is some consistency with regards to amount of training, the taking of an exam, the completion of projects, content to a degree and the notion of teaching others for the more advanced belts.
    2.  As we all know there is no agreed upon certifying organization.  Some may view ASQ as one but they are no different than a university, consultant or any hack who feels they can certify because they read a book once.
    3.  Acceptance of “certification” is largely a degree of anecdotal word of mouth.  Some organizations have established some degree of credibility and receipients of belts from that organization can carry more weight than others.  Not right, just the way it is.
    4.  Some receive certification through a rigorous process of training and coaching, others receive a title as a result of a job function, some self proclaim and who will know differently and some print it up on their home computer.
    It’s still a matter of buyer beware regardless of whether you are hiring a SS professional or contracting with one for services.  Due diligence, careful screening and questioning of references go a long way in protecting the unwary buyer.  Most of the old timers can spot a ringer in a second.  The good ones standout and can be quickly identified as well.  It’s the vast group in the middle that one has to fear.

    0
    #133019

    Joe BB
    Participant

    Stan’s Man!
    Hummm!  Stan’s Man!

    0
    #133027

    Darth
    Participant

    Joe, glad you outed yourself, congratulations.

    0
    #133042

    xu
    Participant

    Ya’ll “good ol’ boy” MBBs –- I hear the Dukes of Hazard theme playing the background — can look down your pointy noses at ASQ BB certification if you choose, but the facts are …
    1. ASQ has placed “a” Body of Knowledge in the public domain that is readily available for inspection, comment, adoption, critique, challenge, etc. by anyone – including other providers of BB certification and self-appointed “six sigma chicken sexers.”
    Any certification vendor can easily benchmark the ASQ BB BOK to demonstrate the superiority of its training and certification offerings. Yet, I do not see any comparative data from any of these sources. Why not? Occam’s Razor says the answer is – They don’t have it. If they had data to demonstrate they do a better job (any data), they would drown us in emails, etc.
    For example, each requirement in the BOK is referenced to Bloom’s Taxonomy. The vast majority of constructs require demonstration of the ability to “apply” (level 3) the concept or tool or a higher level of learning (there are three levels above apply). Yet, I see no reference to Bloom in any on the certification websites. This would be the most basic comparison. A vendor should at least match the ASQ levels of learning in their offerings. Instead, go to the websites. Read the course descriptions and course objectives. The “should be able to” outcome statements use very low levels of learning terminology – “know,” “understand,” etc. Only one publishes an explanation of the process used to develop its materials and courses.
    It is fascinating that vendors whose primary “value” is training people to be get and use data so they can “AIC” do not get and use data to “AIC” their own product and service performance. Must be children of shoemakers.
    2. Anyone take apply to take the ASQ exam. It should be a piece of cake for the experienced MBBs who seek to dominate this website with their clubby bromides. I were as good as you guys say you are and have all that superior experience, I would signup to take the ASQ BB exam. I would show up late, leave my calculator at home, ask to use ink not pencil, and leave early. I challenge you to get an ASQ cert number. Then do your “superior dance.”
    3. I went to two “experienced” SS MBB’s presentations last week. They were horror shows.
     
    One person explained how they had “integrated lean and six sigma.” The company “implemented” SS in 2002 and “integrated” Lean with the SS in 2004. The only “improvements” I heard were four 5S teams and 2 GB projects. After 4 years, their results were:
     
    Productivity improved 20% (They laid off 46% of their workforce).
    On-Time Shipments improved from 60% to 88%. (The target was 95%. What’s the “value” in getting the product across a cleaner plant faster if you can’t get it out the door to the customer on time?)
    Defects decreased from 0.49% to 0.15% (which the MBB described as being 5.55 sigma. Oh brother.)
     
    The other person rambled on about how they had turned “DMAIC” into “IMPROVE PDCA” clearly doubling the number of steps (and complexity) to the process for no apparent reason ther than “cuteness.” The examples presented made no sense. About 22 people now have to re-learn control charts.
     
    Ask me what I think about these “experienced” ergo superior MBBs? So far, “experience” is 0 for 2 with me. Some of the posting at this website are NOT improving this trend.
     
    Regards
     
    ASQ BB #3735
     
    FOOTNOTE: “Chicken sexers” can tell the sex of a chicken by looking at the eggs as they go down the conveyor belt. It is a gift. There is no known way to teach this skill. I get the impression that SS experience provides a similar skill set from some of the MBBs postings.
     
    PS Can I still play in “your” sandbox? I will play nicer if you will.
    Of course, I reserve the right to hit you with my shovel when you step on my castle. I amy not look like much of a castle to you, but it’s my castle. Back off.

    0
    #133043

    Mikel
    Member

    I agree with you.
    There are more idxxts out there than there are good ones. However, Darth is one of the good ones. Joe BB is one of the other type.

    0
    #133045

    Darth
    Participant

    Barry,
    Thanks for your emotion laden homey tirade.  I hope it wasn’t a result of my comment concerning ASQ.  I meant to convey that although ASQ is a widely respected SS provider, it is not a universally recognized nor ordained certification agency.  There are equally competent consultancies that can provide comparable quality training, consulting and certification.  I wonder how ASQ would do if it weren’t a non-profit, industry based organization but had to pay their contractors on a equal footing and to compete in the marketplace.   

    0
    #133047

    Taylor
    Participant

    Darth,Name one consulting firm that provide a certification comaparable to ASQ in value and content.

    0
    #133049

    Darth
    Participant

    I think the difficulty is in judging what constitutes the definition of “value” and “content”.  Certainly ASQ training and certification is cheaper than most consultancies.  It should be since they can subsidize the cost by paying contractors less and using a full online training approach.  Since it is only a small component of their overall business and they are a not-for-profit, the economics are a bit different.  I don’t think that there are significant differences in content.  I think requiring only 1 project and three years of experience is a bit light.  I am not going to get into an argument about ASQ.  They are what they are and for those folks who wish to pursue their training and certification that way, then great.  I would doubt whether they have the capability of a full deployment in any decent sized organization but for one off individual needs, they are fine.

    0
    #133052

    xu
    Participant

    OK, WWL fans, get your folding chairs, beef jerky, and beer. We are ready to rumble.
    In the near corner is Darth the Defective, self-proclaimed MBB.
    In the other corner is Barry Black Belt, certified ASQ BB. 
     
    Let the proceeding begin.
     
    ————————————————————————————Round 1
     
    From Darth —“Thanks for your emotion laden homey tirade.”
     
    To Darthie with Facts — I thought I presented logic and facts. I just asked for comparative data. You are evidently one of those who do not — and cannot – present data or logic to support your position. So, as usual, you call people names and belittle them. You pooh-pooh-head.
     
    PS the word is “folksy” not “homey.” “Homey” is what yo’ mama is. Or it may be “homely” or some other very close variation of those letters.
    ———————————————————————————— 
    Round 2
     
    From Darth – “I meant to convey that although ASQ is a widely respected SS provider, it is not a universally recognized nor ordained certification agency.”
     
    To Darthie with Data –- Darthie, Darthie, Darthie. There you go again. ASQ is formally recognized by ALL other national and international professional accreditation organizations and over 200 countries as T-H-E professional “peer organization” for quality in the United States. I guess you and Michael over in Neverland are not one of those entities.
     
    You not only do not have data; you are misinformed at so many levels on so many things. Your defects are numerous. You are the poster child for the “self-proclaimed MBBs” of the world. You are defective in Verbal and Math skills.
     
    Now, one more time, how many nice people have you visited your enormous MBB prowess on? I think we have isolated the primary variable holding six sigma advancement back. The transformation equation is:
     
    SS Dissatisfaction = f(Darth’s skills).
     
    PS — How’s that for an “emotion laden homey tirade.” Try to match that sarcasm, homey. You don’t have what it takes, just as you don’t have the facts and  data on your side on this one. Go back to the farm, Elton.
    ————————————————————————————
    Round 3
     
    From Darth — “There are equally competent consultancies that can provide comparable quality training, consulting, and certification.”
     
    To Darthie with Love – Really? Let’s see your data. That was my whole point. You assert how great your [is it literally yours?] training and certification are … and yet you provide no data.
     
    Bring data or stay in the shallow end off the pool. Wait! Just go back to the Gemba and keep saving the world from defects. Actually if you were to go back to the Gemba, that would, in itself, qualify as a process improvement. So put it up on the board for Darthie the MBB.
    ————————————————————————————
    Round 4 
     
    Darth the Defective — “I wonder how ASQ would do if it weren’t a non-profit, industry based organization but had to pay their contractors on a equal footing and to compete in the marketplace.
     
    To Darthie with Love – Thanks for the more facts to support my position. ASQ is NFP and industry-based. At last, we get to the real drama. Did bad old ASQ not do business with little Darthie once upon a time? Does Darthie have a bad experience you want to share? Repeat after me, “Hi my name is Darth.” “Hello Darth” “I am a six sigma bully. When I will cannot have everything my way, I will not call other people names. I will learn to love data. Data is my friend.” Now only 11 more steps.
     
    PS – Has anyone told you that you share many similar “issues” as Michael. Lives in a dream world. Thinks he’s Bad. Hides behind a mask. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm. It’s a good thing those nice folks at ASQ tested me on the illogic of extrapolating beyond the data range.
     
    ————————————————————————————
     
    From Stan – “There are more idxxts out there than there are good ones. However, Darth is one of the good ones. Joe BB is one of the other type.”
     
    To Stan with Respect– Thanks for the attempted mediation.
     
    I’m not through playing with Darthie. I have seen enough of Darthie’s postings to know that … Darthie is a defective with multiple defects. He needs to be eliminated. No hidden factory for him .No improvement is possible. Some defectives are perfect unto themselves. So, please excuse me while I continue apply some more of this can of whip@$$ on little Darthie’s behind. I guess he doesn’t get enough of that at home. I like to play nice. I want to play nice. But Darthie should apologize to all those other nice folks he bullies on this website. I will not be one of them. Apologize. That’s Step 2 in the 12-step program, Earl.
     
    ————————————————————————————
    To Darthie – Still waiting for some data from you, bubba. Come on Darthie, you can do it. You can admit you don’t have it. It’s ok. It won’t hurt. Well?
     
    Referee? Barry by TKO?
    Judges? Barry on points?
    ————————————————————————————
    To Darthie with Love – Thanks for occupying my rainy Saturday. Cheers!

    0
    #133053

    xu
    Participant

    ———————————————————————————Round 5
     
    From Darth the Dataless Wonder – “I think the difficulty is in judging what constitutes the definition of “value” and “content”. “
     
    From Barry the Humble BB– First, we will need data to prove the assertion “I think.” You, alone, may prove Rene Descartes wrong after 450 years.
     
    The “customer” – that would be us, the folks who want certification – is the sole judge of “value.” Those nice folks at ASQ test us BB dummies on things like that. It’s question #1. Duh, Homer.
    ————————————————————————————Round 6
     
    From Darth – “Certainly ASQ training and certification is cheaper than most consultancies. It should be since they can subsidize the cost by paying contractors less and using a full online training approach. Since it is only a small component of their overall business and they are a not-for-profit, the economics are a bit different.”
     
    After 13 years of practicing my profession, I decided I wanted to be “certified.” I compared the ASQ BOK to a dozen vendor offerings. I found vast gaps, Worse yet, their telemarketing reps made outlandish misrepresentation as to the credentials of the instructors. So I taught myself the BOK. You only need 2 books – the CQI Primer and Breyfogle. Of course, that’s 2,000 pages and it did take several hundred hours over the period of 1 year. But I did it, and I am proud that I did.
    ————————————————————————————Round 7
     
    From Darth the Dataless Defective – “I don’t think that there are significant differences in content. I think requiring only 1 project and three years of experience is a bit light.”
     
    From Barry with Data – My interviews with the SSBB vendors revealed l-o-w-e-r certification requirements. They only ask you (1) attend class for 4 weeks over 4 months, (2) pay your own travel expense for those 20 days, (3) submit 1 project –not 2 as ASQ does, and (4) have from $7,500 to $15,000 left on your MC or Visa. No proof of prior knowledge. No certification of prior work experience. Nothing.
     
    Of course, your MC/V better not get rejected. These are the same standards used car salesmen use to screen their customers. It’s a pitiful commentary on the level of professionalism in the “certifiation industry.”
    ————————————————————————————Round 8
     
    From Darth the Dataless Defective – “I am not going to get into an argument about ASQ.”
     
    From Barry with Taunt– You already are. It’s just that you see you are losing big, and are trying to duck and cover.
    ————————————————————————————Roudn 9 
     
    From Darth the Dataless Defective – “They [ASQ} are what they are and for those folks who wish to pursue their training and certification that way, then great. I would doubt whether they have the capability of a full deployment in any decent sized organization but for one off individual needs, they are fine.”
     
    From Barry with the Scent of Victory – You are on, cowboy. Set up the gig. I’ll do it on my dime. Gratis. I’ll let you watch. Just don’t let your incredible disciplined dataless MBB mind get in the way.
    ———————————————————————————— 
    Ready to apologize, yet?

    0
    #133055

    Darth
    Participant

    Barry,
    I am blown away by the time and effort you expended putting together your humorous and sarcastic response.  I am humbled by the fact that you had that much time to spend creating it.  The weather must really be bad where ever you reside.  But it was excellent and amusing and I love the font.  Congratulations on a job well done.  I haven’t seen something like this since the old days of Phil.
    I believe that, at the center of your rant, is the difference between those organizations that offer public group training and certification as their main product and organizations that focus on long term SS deployment which will include training and possibly certification along with a host of other activities.  ASQ, along with some universities and other consultancies offer one-off, publically conducted group training with follow-on certification if desired.  Personally, I don’t work for such an organization nor have I ever.  Nor have I ever considered subcontracting for ASQ once I found out the rates that they pay their trainers.  In fact, although we might do SS training as part of a deployment, it is always the client organization that does the “certification” and requirements do vary.  We provide guidance, but in the long run, it is the client that determines final certification. 
    ASQ is certainly a viable alternative for those individuals seeking SS training and certification for whom other options might not exist.  I work alongside people who have ASQ certification and they followed that route because their company would not provide what they needed.  There is a huge difference between public training and a complete deployment.  Your argument revolves around the difference in those organizations that provide such an approach.  I keep saying that ASQ is fine but I have not seen any indication that it is the final word.  Apparently your personal experience with other providers was not satisfactory and I can’t discount that.  But, I am sure somewhere we could find someone with similar negative experiences with ASQ.
    Since you have made the original claim that ASQ is the center of the SS Universe I expect the following from you:
    1.   A clear operational definition of “value” and “content” since you raised those issues
    2.  I assume you can also provide data regarding how many people have been trained by ASQ, why they chose ASQ over others, who has employed them after training, what is their starting compensation package, what have they achieved after 3 years on the job and any other supporting facts that would allow you to continue to claim ASQ superiority over the rest of the world.
    Although this exchange has been fun and I applaud you for your creative work, there is no real argument here.  We both agree that ASQ is fine for those who need/want individual SS training delivered in a cost effective format of online or group setting.  I am saying that there are alternatives, some of which might be as good and some certainly not as good.  If you want to continue claiming that ASQ is the top dog, provide the data to show it.  But then again, who cares!!!!!
    Have a nice Sunday

    0
    #133057

    xu
    Participant

    Darth
     
    I accept your olive branch. I will cop to accepting the null hypothesis and move on. I still think I whipped your MBB butt on argumentation and logic every round, but I defer to your seniority as a prolific and valuable contributor to this website.
     
    I am going to ask ASQ for data. Let’s see if they can meet “our” standards for evidence. (I bet they don’t have data either.)
     
    Thanks for the fun. I got to go watch Philly Dog whip Tiger.

    0
    #133084

    xu
    Participant

    I joined in on this thread for the reason that keeps resonating across it — there is huge variation (beyond 12 sigma?) in MBB training, credentials, experience, and abilities.
    To me this increases the value of  professional certification. At least you know the criteria (BOK and test preparation) it is based on.
    My primary reason for seeking certification through ASQ was to be able to put a credential on my business card whose source and  accreditation standards anyone can verify.
    Some companies require ASQ certification on top of in-house “titling.” Some do not.
    Most vendors provide their own version of “certification” which is IMHO a perversion of the term since it means you get a “certificate” that you completed their version of SS training and usually one project that they oversaw which may not be independently verified.
    I am old school. Part of my professional ethics is that. I do not put credentials on my business card or resume that are NOT fully accredited by a professional organization or national accrediting body, e.g., undergraduate and graduate degrees and professional association memberships and certifications. To me — evidently just me — vendor and company SS certification do not meet that criterion. They have no place on a business card. They are not the same type “credenital.”

    0
    #133090

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Barry,
    So are you a MBB, BB, GB, YB, WB, etc? If so, why?
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #133095

    Jered Horn
    Participant

    Barry,
    Please don’t take this the wrong way.  I have no interest in getting into a WWL (???) brawl with you.
    I am curious, though…Where are you coming from, with your “humble” opinions?  You’ve obviously got a lot of bark.  How’s your bite?
    I want to be open-minded…because I do see value in the ASQ certification “program”.  Maintaining high and consistent training/testing material standards and the re-certification requirement are both valuable.  However, I think you’re wrong if you think ASQ is the only “vendor or company” that holds up to the ASQ “value” standard.
    The variation in “training, credentials, experience, and abilities” is something that frustrates a lot of us.  I would like to see the data that suggests ASQ certification reduces that variation.  I come from an “old school” as well.  One where you don’t measure experience and abilities with pencil and paper, degrees, or certifications.

    0
    #133101

    SixSigmaDude
    Member

    My first impression on Barry’s tirade……sounded like he doesnt have much confidence in himself or the training he got through ASQ……he sounded like he was trying to convince himself that all was “good”…..!! 

    0
    #133106

    xu
    Participant

    JM Horn Well spoken. No argument here.
    Bark? Who me? Bite? Read on.
    I am certain many companies and training vendors do their best to design and present their offerings. by definition, Smith’s invisible hand regulates vendor quality, and Chandler’s visible hand regulates company quality (in the long run).
    For my enlightened self-interest, intents, and purposes, I did ASQ because I had the education (graduate+), experience (10 years+), and motivation (cheapness+) to do it  — “it” being “get certified” — on my own w/n 1 year for under $500 —  including all the ASQ fees.
    I hang around this forum to learn — and I have. There several bona fide experts (borderline gurus), but the “variation” (polite term) in MBBs (judging from their questions) is a horror show.
    Gresham’s Law is “bad currency drives out good” meaning diluted certifications drive out valid certifications. Some of us see ASQ as dilution of professional certification. I have a different prism (to mix metaphors). We all see what we want to see, but I am pig-headed enough to see it this way. IMHO, I vendor certification does not meet the standard of “professional certification ” to be used on a business card, resume, or PPT title slide.
    It’s similar to asking a golfer, “What’s your handicap?” Some folks carry a USGA card with their index. Some folks guess (read that “lie”). I carry a USGA card. I also say to anyone (card or no card): “Stick it in the dirt and hit it.”
    We come from divergent perspectives, but we converge on the same acid test for BBs, MBBs, or  whatever —   “Stick it in the dirt and hit it.
    Regards

    0
    #133107

    xu
    Participant

    SSDude
    Nice hack at pop psych. No foul. No shot.
    But you should give Dr. Phil or Oprah a call.
    Do the terms “transference” or “projection” ring any Psych 101 bells for you? In that vein, what does it say about YOUR self-confidence when you use a pseduonym to sign your thoughts?
    Let me know when you want to “tee it up” on SS (see pervious email).
    Regards

    0
    #133108

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Barry,
    You said:

    We come from divergent perspectives, but we converge on the same acid test for BBs, MBBs, or  whatever —   “Stick it in the dirt and hit it.
    So why is it that so many that judge by certifications don’t use that rule? And what have your stuck in the dirt and hit?
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #133109

    xu
    Participant

    29 projects since 1993. Some LHF. Some big. Multiple NAISCs.
    And you, sir?

    0
    #133110

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Barry,
    I started Six Sigma projects in 1995. Since, have personally completed to success over 50 projects (failed 2 times), was MBB on nearly 400 projects, and have certified a dozen MBBs and over 150 BBs. Was dubbed by my former employer as “Sensei” in 2002 (whatever that is worth).
    If you started Six Sigma in 1993 you must have been at Motorola, Allied, or GE.
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #133112

    Mikel
    Member

    Allied did not train until 95, GE 96. If he is from 93 he is from a very select group of people who several on here know most of. Let’s see what he claims – I’ll bet the claim of 93 is BS.

    0
    #133113

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Hello Stan,
    I haven’t been around here for awhile (other that the last couple weeks). But good to hear from you again.
    I agree, I think he was a leader in the beginning, mistaken regarding his start, or full of it.
    BTW, I think both Allied and GE started before you said. They just don’t say that. But I have been wrong before.
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #133115

    Mikel
    Member

    Mike and I were there for both. Planning for Allied started in 94, first class in Jan 95. Planning for GE started in 95, the mass innoculation of GE’s first “MBB’s” (what a joke!) in late 95, first training of BB’s in 96.

    0
    #133116

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stan,
    You know we will both be in agreement on the Allied date. The Automotive guys launched in Knoxville, Tn in January 1995.
    The only thing that could alter GE a bit was there were a couple pilot projects. John Hathaway I think had one going in Med Systems before Jan uary of 96 and there was another project that I came in on the tail end of (Analyze – Control) in GEAE.
    Regards

    0
    #133127

    Dr. Scott
    Participant

    Stan,
    Well you and Mike did something right (as usual). Things seemed to have worked out for both companies. Wish I was there too.
    Thanks for the information.
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #133141

    SSDude
    Member

    No pop psyche here Barry…just very surprised at your two posting tirade on Darth…!!  That came out of left field..!!  My experience with a response like that is…usually that person is very troubled or low on self esteem…(Oprah, Dr Phil…here I come…book me, my Wednesdays are open).  And as far as my pseduonym….”Barry” isnt much different….for all I know your name could really be Alfred….
    And for your info, I am a BB, cert’ed through GE….and everyone can bad mouth the GE deal…but I know what I can do….and have proven it in GE as well as other companies.  

    0
Viewing 33 posts - 1 through 33 (of 33 total)

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