Defect Analysis project – direction needed
Six Sigma – iSixSigma › Forums › Old Forums › General › Defect Analysis project – direction needed
- This topic has 13 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 9 months ago by
fake accrington alert.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 26, 2007 at 4:03 pm #48236
BambaceParticipant@JessicaInclude @Jessica in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Experts,
I have just been assigned a new project – need some direction on the approach. Here is the goal statement: Can soemone help me with a approach? Should I process map first, then build a ABC? etc…Identify, categorize, and baseline defects across the company value chain. Achieve a X% reduction in critical defects that impact downstream processes and customer satisfaction.
0September 26, 2007 at 4:16 pm #161803
Chad TaylorParticipant@Chad-TaylorInclude @Chad-Taylor in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Jessica
Your statement seems a little broad; can you make it a little more specific to area of concern? Or is this a high level executive project.
Chad Taylor0September 26, 2007 at 5:09 pm #161805You need to pushback and pare the scope down considerably. This is not a project, it is likely multiple projects.
Your Boss needs to realize that this is “World Hunger”.0September 26, 2007 at 8:10 pm #161820Jessica- I agree with the others here. You have really been charged with two things. The first is to establish a metrics and reporting system around defects in your processes. This is more of a business process improvement project that may need some changes to defect reporting, data collection, and analysis. If you already have a good defect tracking system the baseline should be easy (control charts, paretos, etc.)
The second part of this (defect reduction) will really depend on what you find in the first part. You may have several projects focused on specific defects and their root causes. These improvements in cumulative may help meet the reduction target. If you try to tackle all the major contributiors in one project you will find issues with timelines and focus. Therefore your statement is really more of an initative or program in which smaller better scoped project should be identified.
Good scoping of the projects is key. Once scoped properly, then it will evident on what to do to move forward (process mapping, process measurements, defect analysis, FMEA’s, DOE’s, etc).0October 2, 2007 at 1:29 am #162253I would start by doing a pareto of your defects that are critical to quality (CTQ). Once this is done you have a starting point, Some like to use 80/20, I personally like to use 50/4 to narrow the scope. While using Cpk Calculation will tell you where you are, generally talking with the operators will give you a good start on the Why’s. Also take a look at the variation in time to complete a task. Higher variations generally indicate quality issues that the operators are dealing with. Then proceed with all of the analysis tools available.
0October 2, 2007 at 1:33 am #162255
ConfusedParticipant@ConfusedInclude @Confused in your post and this person will
be notified via email.50/4?
I’m comfused0October 2, 2007 at 2:07 am #16225980/20 rule is a power curve
50/4 lies on the same power curve but with tighter focus.0October 2, 2007 at 2:12 am #162260
ConfusedParticipant@ConfusedInclude @Confused in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Do you have an example? I’m lost
If i had 100 data points on a pareto scale that has a uniform distribution, what would a 50/4 look like and how would it be interpreted?0October 2, 2007 at 2:33 am #162268What this means is that 4% of your issues create 50% of your problems. Do your pareto, sort from high to low and concentrate on the top 4%. Very often, especially if you do not have process teams but must go across functional areas, it can be benefical to highly focus. Reducing your problems from 20% to 4% does this quite well. Then go back and do it again if time an resources permit.
Steve0October 2, 2007 at 2:59 am #162273
ConfusedParticipant@ConfusedInclude @Confused in your post and this person will
be notified via email.well wouldn’t that be a 4/50 rule vs. 50/4? sorry, i’m confused
0October 2, 2007 at 3:22 am #162274
BrandonParticipant@BrandonInclude @Brandon in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Nice catch, Confused.
0October 2, 2007 at 6:21 am #162279
fake accrington alertParticipant@fake-accrington-alertInclude @fake-accrington-alert in your post and this person will
be notified via email.If I’m the famous
Stan I would tell you to do you your own homewok which you are paid for and stop using this fORUM as a “Spoonfed” port.
fake Stan Alert0October 2, 2007 at 6:49 am #162291
fake accrington alertParticipant@fake-accrington-alertInclude @fake-accrington-alert in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Keep it like this ,otherwise you will not be confused
0October 2, 2007 at 6:56 am #162292
fake accrington alertParticipant@fake-accrington-alertInclude @fake-accrington-alert in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Jessica
You are lucky because your name is Jessica.
So every decent expert is jumping up to do your homework for you.Imagine what will happen if your name is “ATI”?What kind of silly responses you would receive from Stan,Darth,etc.
Can I borrow you name for one week?0 -
AuthorPosts
The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.