iSixSigma

How long is the Six Sigma Fad going to last???

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General How long is the Six Sigma Fad going to last???

This topic contains 32 replies, has 18 voices, and was last updated by  Johnny 17 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 33 posts - 1 through 33 (of 33 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27491

    Poornima
    Participant

    HI
    I just want to know from anybody in this forum about long will this fad of Six Sigma last…
    I have come across a lot of people in the Industry claiming that like ISO9000 Six Sigma has just become a fad which different companies are trying to Implement without really going thru the rigor and spirit of the same..

    Thanks a lot in advance

    0
    #67464

    Supriyo Das
    Member

    Hi Poornima

    To think of it we know what kind of credibility did ISO 9001:1994 landed organizations into down the line, when many companies had certifications purely for market requirements and not for serious process improvement efforts. And yes there are registering bodies who ensured that there were more and more orgn. getting “certified” so as to increase the impression of the clientele list they serviced.

    With Six Sigma, it is really to be seen to believe how some organizations have used it. Few have certainly, demonstrated major improvements in the earlier phases of DMAIC – and then there are others who have reported upto the Anlyze Phase alone and never really published down the Control Phase.

    So in trying to answer this question to myself, I found that if there were organizations (lets talk of India) who were serious, there could be some genuine results demonstrating reduced variations – thought the impact converted to dollars could at times reduce the phenomena. However, given the slump in the IT economy in general, organisations could gain heavily if and only if they were demonstrated perseverence in implementing Six Sigma..and yes then it does not remain a fad no more. Otherwise, it could last as long as the Statistical Process Control Clause of ISO 9001:1994 did.

    0
    #67473

    Jina Jayanetti
    Participant

    Personal Opinion:  If it is referred to in your business as a fad, it will be treated as such and will have the same long lasting effects as a fad.  However, the tools have already stood the test of time.  The portion of the “Six Sigma” hype  that can be grossly misapplied is the deployment.  How many to train?  Who to train?  Project Selection? Quantifying Results?  Black Belt vs Green Belt?  Dedicated vs Part time?  All these questions must be answered by each organization and they MUST fit into the direction the company is seeking to go, and be answered accordingly.
    So in short…if it is a fad in your company, don’t look for it to last very long.  However, if you are serious about discovering root causes to your problems and solving them with confidence while learning more about your processes than you ever thought was possible…Six Sigma tools and methodology will take you wherever you want to go.

    0
    #67474

    Ken Domonkos
    Participant

    I don’t think that Six Sigma is a fad. Any ” program ” that allows you to implement a discipline that enables you to discover, measure, analyze, improve and re-engineer business processes to continuously cut cycle time, reduce costs and improve quality across the enterprise will always be accepted. In my opinion it is the lack of or difficulty of use of the ” tools ” that are needed in Six Sigma that make its adoption a difficult process – no pun intended.

    0
    #67476

    Grant Blair
    Participant

    If we’re willing to learn from history: The Deming movement lasted from (roughly) 1980-1990, ISO 9000 from 1990 until 2000. (we’ll see what happens with the new standard};-). Accordingly, we can expect Six Sigma to be around until 2010…9 more years, until it starts getting replaced by something else.
     
     

    0
    #67477

    Cecil James
    Participant

    Obviously, six sigma will be around so long as its usefullness justifies it.  Like any other program of legitimate value, six sigma seems to provide companies some sense of finding and effectively resolving quality problems.  When a new program comes along and demonstrates equal or greater benefits with less costs then six sigma as we know it now will be displaced. 
    The thing to wonder is what would six sigma’s successor look like?  A hybrid six sigma/ISO9000?  Who knows, or better yet pretend to know.  What matters is that six sigma, when rightly applied, appears to be issuing grand rewards.  It’s methodology and underlying philosophy has both practical and tacit utility.  Those purporting six sigma as only a fad, are normally those refusing to grab it by both hands, feel it, squeeze it, and scrutinize it from all perspectives.  Six sigma is a remarkable construct and though by name may not be around forever, it’s theories will impact any legatee of worth.

    0
    #67488

    Poornima
    Participant

    Thank you so much everyone for your feedback. The reason is that I have been a Six Sigma practitioner for the last three years and off late I have been feeling disillusionised with the way most companies go about implementing Six Sigma
     

    0
    #67490

    Murray
    Participant

    They are right – a lot of people are bullshitting their way through this.
    A fad? I think not. Companies improving bottom line results while improving customer satisfaction is a mandate of the market. those who pretend will perish. Survival of the fittest – pretenders are not fit.

    0
    #67496

    Sambuddha Chakraborty
    Member

    Poornima,
    I can see why you asked the question. And I feel,  the answer is hidden in your question. The success of Six-Sigma (call it by another name if you want) as a bottom-line oriented business model is very much a function of how a company approaches the deployment of the strategy accross its operations.
    Thus, to Jina’s point, if a company thinks it is a fad, so shall it become….for that particular company.Why would anyone implement it, when the leadership doesn’t have faith in it. On the other hand, if you understand the true value and the power of the SixSigma Thought Process, and deploy it accordingly, you will be able achieve sustained and breakthrough improvements.
    The choice is really clear – consider Six Sigma as a fad, and end up with inappropriate execution and wasted resources OR embrace it to your benefit and get your organization to the next level of quality, profitability and operational excellence.
    My $0.02 worth….
    Best,
    Sambuddha
     

    0
    #67499

    Presley
    Participant

    Dear Poomima:Jina & Sambuddha have done a nice job of hitting the nail on the head.For SS to remain alive and well in any organization, and not fall into the status of “fad”, it takes at least three critical elements. Leadership, diffusion and cultural change.Regarding leadership, at GE and 3M, variable compensation of top management is tied to the success of SS. Also, many successful organizations reward their Belts and team members with a small percentage of the project savings, in addition to company wide displays of the project’s progress and accomplishments.The weakest area for many companies are the cultural issues. That is dealing with the hidden factories, aka the fat in the silo. Since, Most Black Belts and Masters are home grown and are well connected with the status quo. This makes it difficult for them to remain open minded when it comes to dealing with the bureaucarcy imbedded in the hidden factories.If any one of the these three critical elements, and there are others, is not addressed in the planning stage, only part of the SS potential will be achieved. The word “fad” is soon to follow.Of the dozen or so books currently published on implementing and managing SS, we recommend George Eckes’ “Making Six Sigma Last” as a primer for dealing with the cultural issues of implementing and managing SS.We hope this helps. Keep the faith.
    Regards,
    Presley…

    0
    #67502

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    I’ve been in the quality industry for 20 years, audited and consulted with probably 100 companies. EVERY iteration of quality improvement has been a fad including ISO-9000. I have NEVER seen a company REALLY DO QUALITY nor do I believe that we should try AT LEAST THE WAY THE QUALITY PROGRAMS present it. The cost justification isn’t there REGARDLESS of attempts to prove otherwise. The fact that you raise the question is enough of a seed of doubt to GUARANTEE that 6 Sigma WILL BE and IS ALREADY a fad. The bottom line is that MOST quality initiatives are sizzle and not steak and MOST REAL quality improvements are engineering or inspirationally driven… NOT program driven. We’ve wasted a lot of money on quality programs in this country. For the amount of money I’ve seen clients spend compared to the REAL impact on their quality, it’s ridiculous. It all comes down to attitude about quality, not quality programs. And YOU CAN’T MEASURE ATTITUDE… only the results of it. Just like a person, I can say the right things but not mean what I say. In the end, how I perform is all that’s real. Everything else is hype.

    0
    #67503

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    Look at it another way. Can anybody show me demonstrate an impact on GE’s “the supposed leader in 6 sigma” stock performance since it started using 6 sigma to competitors who did not over a similar time period? If not, then this is all hype.

    0
    #67504

    mcintosh
    Participant

    >”It all comes down to attitude about quality, not quality programs. And YOU CAN’T MEASURE ATTITUDE”
    But do we need to measure attitude, or do we just need to compensate people appropriately? Going to the extreme (understanding that there are flaw with this), if you modify someone’s compensation to be 100% for the ‘support of quality’, won’t you see the results you want?

    0
    #67505

    TCJ
    Member

    I can not answer your question about GE, but I can tell you how Six Sigma allowed myself and a team to develop solutions in two weeks to a labeling issues that was costing Johnson and Johnson $90,000 per year. The power of Six Sigma is that it reveals hidden variables that are impacting your process, which allows you to focus on root causes instead of wasting time, money, and effort trying to fix everything. Prior to the use of the DMAIIC methodology much time was squandered in meetings to resolve the labeling issue. The solution that evolved from those meetings was increased/automated inspection systems. The Six Sigma team identified several opportunities for improvement that primarily focused on reduced handling of labels. This simplified our process, improved quality, and prevented us from purchasing costly equipment that would have only serve to sort bad product versus eliminate the cause of our defects.

    0
    #67514

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    I appreciate your response. I am not questioning or challenging the use of a formal method and/or the use of statistical tools to solve an identified problem, particularly if “quick fixes” didn’t work. The tools of six sigma are good to have just like a hammer in your tool box can come in handy. But many months have passed in my life without the need for the hammer and I don’t carry it around with me just in case I’ll need it. Nor do I go to any great effort to prove to anyone that I own one.
    Tools like six sigma become programs and fads when we start taking the hammer out of the tool box and pounding on things just because we have it and want or feel pressured to prove to our customers that we own the tool. Owning it is fine. Using it for the sake of using it is stupid. And even paying the price to own it has to be weighed against the freqency of need to use it. Do you own a roto-rooter? Most home owners will need one a few times in their life but everyone I know rents it and/or hires the service out. They don’t spend the money to buy one.
    Said another way, congratulations that you were able to use six sigma tools to solve your labling problem. Now put the tool back in the toolbox until another clearly applicable need arises. Don’t waste time walking around looking for something else to fix with the tool just because it’s in your hand. And don’t go buy hammers for everyone now. You own a hammer. I’ll come borrow yours when I need it!

    0
    #67515

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    Absolutely not. Compensation has very little to do with work ethic and that’s what we’re really talking about when we talk about attitude. I believe that the major flaw with quality programs is the perception that if we give people the tools they need to do a job right and teach them how to use them then they’ll use those tools. Bunk! I own a hammer. I’ve shown my wife where it is and how to use it and I still catch her trying to pound in a picture hook nail using the heel of her shoe! Worse yet, if I’m standing there holding a heavy picture waiting on her I’m likely to say, “Bag the hammer. Here, use my shoe! This sucker’s heavy and I’m not willing to wait for you to do it right?”
    And that’s the rub with management. Gurus preach that it’s motivation, training, tools, whatever. I’m pretty persuaded it’s management’s unwillingness to take the time… to wait. And since making money fast will aways have more followers than making things “perfect” (and buy the way I think that’s the way it should be) quality programs that preach the way “we should do things” is really nothing more than one philospophy against another. It’s pretty clear to me that the quality camp has lost the debate and what continues is primarily self-serving.

    0
    #67518

    Sambuddha Chakraborty
    Member

    Mr. Hammer,
    Clearly, in your experience, sir,  you have seen quality initiatives to either fail, or not live upto their expectations.
    But why blame the program for the failure of the initiatives? It could be because it took people a lot of time and resource to understand how to implement Six Sigma in the proper way – whether it is a small company, large corporation, financial, manufacturing or software company that we are talking about. In otherwords, the failure mode could have been in many cases a lack of proper execution and  not necessarily any inadequacy of the tools to aid problem solving.
     Besides, one of your premises looks like to be the fact that Six-Sigma is a toolchest. While in one level (mainly for training) it is true, yet, an equally big pillar of Six Sigma is the accompanying change in the way people solve problems from test-build-fix mode to DMAIC mode. Also the support structures for the program, namely, Blackbelts, Champions are supposed to provide leadership to get (large) mass of trained people to think in a different way – they are the change agents. Without that what you would have seen, has a high chance to happen.
    So with successful implementation of Six Sigma, why should one take the pains of picking up the right tool (or a hammer if that is appropriate)?
    It’s because the Thought Process of people would have changed. They will see the bigger picture and a more complete picture of their value chain. They will then ask the question “should I use my shoe or I need a hammer to do this job?” before they pickup the former like a robot.
     It will not happen in a day, but I believe it will happen if the program is deployed properly. (That is totally separate discussion)
    Sometimes you just have to leap, and build your wings on the way down.
    Best,
    Sambuddha
     

    0
    #67519

    “Ken”
    Participant

    Edgar,While I agree with most of your previous comments above, your most recent comment regarding stock price begs of a few questions. Are you suggesting that stock price is the true measure of the success of any initiative, let alone a quality initiative? Are there other indicators that would provide insight into the success of a business due to one or more changes in the way business is done?Sometimes we get a little hardened while being in the middle of the jungle. I am guilty of this from time to time. Usually, if I stand back and take a deep breath I will find observables of improved ways of doing business. Like you I don’t believe those observables yield the actual numbers claimed by most Six Sigma organizations, but I do believe the disciplined process of making fact based decisions makes a difference. I’ve seen it make the difference in my work over the years with many teams in many organizations across the globe. Ken

    0
    #67520

    “Ken”
    Participant

    There is a long standing perception that Six Sigma is about tools. This perception came about from the genesis of Six Sigma and its close connection with the applied statistical tools. Using this perception the question is which tool is the correct one to use. Human nature tends to drive many to use the same tool(s), because of past success. This circle of tool use is a vicious one. It forces us to believe that success in Six Sigma is driven by our statistical acumen, rather than a logical business sense. This thought process is falacious!Six Sigma is not about the tools. To put it in your language selecting the hammer over the shoe.
    In my experience, Six Sigma is about returning the responsibility of product quality back into the hands of management where is rightfully resides. Six Sigma is about retooling managment with new concepts for running the business using better tools than they used in the past. Many of these concepts are only now reaching the academic business institutions. Most are still not accepted. Six Sigma is about an infrastructure supporting continuous business improvement through organized change management practices. Lastly, Six Sigma is about distributing the knowledge capital and language of improvement to set a basis for constancy. If Six Sigma does not live up to these claims, then does the concept fail? Perhaps as Sambuddha suggests, one should ask whether the implementation failed. Do we logically condem the process which involves a paradigm shift, or a poor execution of such?In the final analysis the benefits of changing the quality and operating systems for the business rests solely with the business. All we can do is look at the outputs, and ask if any of it is meaningful…Ken

    0
    #67521

    “Ken”
    Participant

    errata correction in previous posting:Next to last paragraph should read,Lastly, Six Sigma is about distributing the knowledge capital and language of improvement to set a basis for constancy of purpose.

    0
    #67522

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    Sambuddha,
    I appreciate your vigor. I once had it also. Understand that I have not seen just one quality program fail but dozens. I’ve seen quality programs revamped and remarketed now for 20 years. Why do we think we have it right this time? I don’t really hear anything different than I’ve been hearing for years.
    It’s like environmental activism. Activists ask, don’t you think the environment is important? Yes, everyone thinks the environment is important, but ceeding that doesn’t mean that I’m going to sell my SUV. Just because I agree that the environment is important doesn’t mean that it has to become my single vision in life to protect it at all costs.
    I’ve probably written 50 quality systems in my career. I’m quite good! I have yet to have seen one company see the system as more than a means to a certificate. They all know that it’s simply the cost of doing business.
    I’ll bet I’ve had 20 clients receive letters from customers that said if you didn’t implement such and such a system by such and such a time you’ll be removed as a supplier. I’ve never seen a single company follow through on one of those threats.
    You see, I’m not blaming the program for it’s failure. I’m challenging the very presumption that we need the program as prescribed in the first place. If management thought quality was as important as the qualty gurus do, things would change rapidly. But guess what… they don’t. And isn’t there something to be said for the “common wisdom” of management? I now accept that the business leaders of corporate America are the business leaders of corporate America because they know more than I do about making money. And for me, their actions speak louder than their words.

    0
    #67523

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    Ken:
    Yes, I am saying that the bottom line for a majority of businesses is profit. We can argue whether or not it should be but that’s not the point, it is. And therefore, every program, quality, employee retention, cost reduction, must compete with other initiatives, ideas, and events based on it’s ability to affect the bottom line. And I argue that quality initiatives have returned a poor ROI.
    And yes, fact based problem solving is useful. But again, just because you saw it make a difference doesn’t mean it was the best use of your time and resources. Just because something has merit does not lead to the conclusion that it should therefore be done.
    Tack

    0
    #67524

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    Ken:
    The responsibility for quality has never left the hands of management. Management just doesn’t think its as important as you do.
    It’s only your perception that Six Sigma tools are better tools for management. I think management is way ahead of you. I think your tools are obsolete.
    I argue that these approaches that you say are not accepted are being rejected by individuals smarter than you or I.
    I am a conservative Christian. I believe abortion is wrong. I say this to make a point about quality and not to promote my personal beliefs. There are those who would say I need to open my eyes, to see things differently, that my thinking is dated and foolish, that I need a paradigm shift in my thinking. I say they’re wrong. I know something they don’t! God is real and His word is more important than man’s reasoning.
    Likewise, I believe that corporate America has already weighed in on the topic of quality initiatives. They know something quality guru’s don’t… how to make money.

    0
    #67525

    Sambuddha
    Member

    Mr. Hammer,
    I can see your point of view and I view your comments in the light of retrospection. I couldn’t agree more with you on the gulf of difference that has existed and exists even today between the stated and the observed priorities of business leadership. It is the gap that can make an initiative look like a fad, a corporate policy look like a joke. I have seen that. As a change agent, that is one battle I fight most – convincing disillusioned people (who have seen systems come and go) that this time it is here to stay, this time around they should not make a half-hearted effort. Because if they do, no system in the world can help give them a facelift. 
    It is true that in many cases the leaders would say, what Wall Street would like to hear, and practice business of insanity – doing the same old thing and expecting different results. Yet, that is not a problem of SixSigma or any quality system but that of our modern day leadership that is more bent towards managing change while they should lead it. And you are totally right about the fact that these systems have been packaged, repackaged and sold with various wrappers (I have only read and seen it happen recently, you have experienced that in your long career) yet, that is why you have people who are at the business end of this systems and others like you who spread the richness you have within for your clients’ benefit and not ask a zillion dollars in return.
    And to Ken’s point, that is the business paradigm we are in. It is like walls around us. In order to get to a point where we say what we do, and do what we say, a shift in paradigm will be needed. No one knows what agent will bring that shift…. six-sigma being a bottomline driven model shows promise.
    Else, we probably will need to wait until it becomes a question of survival when we would be addressing the failure of our business leadership to implement best practices.

    0
    #67529

    Murray
    Participant

    Mr. Hammer,
    20 years in Quality and never seen Quality work? Get out of Quality now, you are ruining it for anyone who has a clue.
    Also please keep this a secret from Toyota, they don’t know quality does not work yet

    0
    #67534

    Praneet
    Participant

    Yo TCJ
    Way to go man !!! Hi Poornima,,, there are only two ways in which you can go once a company initiates the Six Sigma initiative ..either up or down..it all depends on how the Attitude of the Top Management.. Always remember that in a bottle the Bottleneck is always at the top likewise the bottleneck for successfully sustaining this initiative is at the Top …
    Having said this Mr Hammer quite a few companies have started reporting Savings thru Six Sigma as part of their balance sheet figures…
     
    Cheers
     

    0
    #67536

    M.K.Ramanujam
    Participant

    I am undergoing a 6 sigma Black Belt training and I am convinced like any other system / tool etc. if used with proper perspective, this would yield result.
    I really do not approve of the ‘system becomes a fad’ idea. It is us – the people who can either make a system work or make it another ‘flavour of the month’.
    So the time period of six sigma ‘fad’ is directly proportional to the quality of the people using (or abusing) this tool. Take GE for example, they are on it steadily for about 8 years reaping steady rewards. They are one of the most admired companies now…
    Bottomline: Six sigma is no fad for understanding professionals. For others, this will last till the next concept raises in the quality horizon…

    0
    #67545

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    I didn’t say quality doesn’t work or that it doesn’t matter. I said quality programs (and I really mean “canned programs”) aren’t accepted and driven by management like the gurus think they should be… and they never will be not matter how we keep repackaging it.

    0
    #67550

    Grant Blair
    Participant

    I’m thinking you’re missing Ken’s point, so let’s try another anology. If you subscribe to current physics theories, you would have to understand quantum theory. However, quantum theory BUILDS on Relativity, which BUILDS on Newtonian theory. If your management thinks Shewhart was thrown out the window when Deming came along, and ISO 9000 replaced Japanese quality management when it came along, then its no wonder they’re  missing the point about Six Sigma.
    As a further aside, if your managment thinks their role is to always maximize short-term profit, they are also missing another point. Managment’s role is to keep the company in business!!!  Always been a quick way to test this, by identifying a cost savings, and see what management does about it. If they pass it along to the customer by lowering price, they’re in for the long run. However, if they decide to reward themselves with higher profits, then they’re only thinking about short-term rewards. Does your company operate on a 1-year or a 20-year business plan? Many Japanese companies do the latter.
     

    0
    #67558

    Edgar Hammer
    Participant

    I agree that many Japanese companies do the later. I’m not sure they’re playing by the same rules as US companies in so much as they operate under different gov’t incentives and guidelines. Regardless, the question I’m falling back to is why do we think long-term focus is better when, dispite the rhetoric, it appears [to me] that most companies are actually driven by short-term profit objectives. I don’t care that they say they have long-term objectives. What they do reveals their true motivation or at best a misunderstanding of what long-term focus means.
    Asked another way, would you recommend a company consider a Six Sigma initiative and all the cost and investment involved IF the CEO said to you in no uncertain terms, “We are a short-term driven company and that will always be the primary criteria for day-to-day decisions?” You might try to argue that he/she should change their criteria, but as if that’s it, then I’d hope you’d say, “Well then don’t waste your time with Six Sigma.” Well what’s the difference whether the CEO says it or not if that’s how in fact he operates? If I know that he operates on a short-term basis, then aren’t I doing that company a disservice promoting an incompatible program?
    There is nothing wrong with Six Sigma as a concept. I just think that most companies are too short-term oriented to embrace it. It’s not the program that fails. It’s the assumption that it should work that is flawed because the conditions aren’t there for it to work. I’m not saying that I agree it should be that way, I’m just resigned to that conclusion and do have a sense that it’s inevitiable in a market driven economy… but that’s another discussion.
    Where management truly has a long-term focus, a resolve to stick to it, and enough open-mindedness to effect and lead the slow process of cultural change, give them the best you have and Six Sigma is the best program I’ve seen yet for that goal. But when those conditions aren’t met, which I believe is the case most of the time, then I believe to try and sell Six Sigma is like trying to sell ice cubes to eskimos. You may make the sell, but in the end, the eskiomos wasted their money and I believe you’ve done them a disservice.
    I’ll have to rest this debate in the interest of time, at least mine participation, giving you all the final word. It has been a healthy and encouraging debate for me and I hope for you also. I appreciate your time.

    0
    #67576

    Anonymous
    Participant

    I’m going to stay anonymous for the time being, because I’m not sure that this forum is a fair place for me.  My apologies, I believe it may be psychological “fear of forum”  – like being afraid of large crowds..
    Anyway, let me respond to the last posting.
    “Compensation has very little to do with work ethic and that’s what we’re really talking about when we talk about attitude.”  Compensation to me includes the respect of my peers, how often I get a word in edgeways, the satisifaction of seeing the boat turn in the direction I want it to go, the time on the job and alternatively the time away.  My compensation, and the compensation of most people I know is a multi-dimensional molecule – and until you map the molecule you won’t have a clue why I stay at a job, and why I will be motivated.  So, my compensation package has everything to to do with my work ethic – the fact that most don’t try and understand me beyond the dollars and cents is your failure, not mine.
    And by the way, at my house, we go and get the hammer before we lift the picture, so that we are prepared.  Don’t confuse poor organization with poor motivation.
    “And since making money fast will aways have more followers than making things “perfect” (and buy the way I think that’s the way it should be) quality programs that preach the way “we should do things” is really nothing more than one philospophy against another. It’s pretty clear to me that the quality camp has lost the debate and what continues is primarily self-serving.”
    What is a quality camp, by the way?  Are these obsessive-compulsives like me who believe that quality should supercede good business judgement?  That there is some higher order than giving the customer the best within the restrictions that are imposed by outside forces?  Let’s be reasonable – your argument is the same that I keep hearing from government-hired employees.  I’d love to give you all huge raises – why not, after all you are worth it – how about a million dollars a year for every government employee in the United States?  Forgive me for my poor anonymous opine, but when I see someone say “make money fast” is the holy grail, I just look at my stock portfolio of high-tech companies that I thought would “make money fast” over the last two years.
    Six Sigma is a mathematical term – in that context it will be around forever.  It’s only a fad because someone dreamt up a marketing plan and branded it.  Marketing plans by nature are designed to rapidly become yesterday’s beer.

    0
    #67577

    Anonymous
    Participant

    ohfercryingoutloud.
     
    Sure, let’s judge companies by their stock price.  That’s a multidimensional analysis, better yet, let’s suggest that it become the parameter of choice for oh, let’s say the Baldridge award.
     

    0
    #67886

    Johnny
    Participant

    I only just found this long debate.  I am surprised to find so many optimists for six sigma.  It seems many people have been very fortunate with their companies and projects, that there is little resistance in their six sigma undertakings. 
    Do you not have project team members who show little enthusiasm because they have plenty other work to do or because they are not compensated as well as Black Belts? Do you not have champions who give minute involvement and basically only set targets and grant approvals?  I am not talking about concept or theories now, just what happens in reality.

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

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