iSixSigma

is TQM really a failure?

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General is TQM really a failure?

Viewing 27 posts - 1 through 27 (of 27 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #33116

    sreedher
    Member

    Did TQM really fail? Is it wise to use…”Why Six Sigma is successful where TQM failed?” Is it the ‘way’ in which people approached TQM failed rather than TQM itself?

    0
    #89140

    thanachs
    Member

    I used to work with a Six Sigma company and a TQM company. I understood that TQM is based on PDCA cycle but Six Sigma is based on DMAIC which is similar to PDCA cycle of  TQM. In fact, I don’t see any differeces between Six Sigma and TQM except Six Sigma provde methodology, tool and organization (ie. how to use the methedology and tool effectively) but TQM provide only methodology and tools. . I would say, TQM provide the tools to solve the probelm, Six Sigma provide the methodology, tools and also provide the method to intergrated Six Sigma into the organization.. In another word, Six Sigma is “TQM + application hand book”
    Just my opinion

    0
    #89437

    Choudhari
    Participant

    TQM requires the mental acceptance of everyone in the organisation towards continual improvement on methods and processes.  In situations I have seen, people tend to take the strategy of improvement to their mind only if they are watched!! and tend to loosen when the breakes are off.  This feature attributes the failure of TQM as a philosophy.  Six-Sigma is an application tool and it shows results faster quantitatively.
     

    0
    #89438

    Miftahul Bayan
    Participant

    I agree, but maybe many people said Six Sigma is TQM using a steroid is true. There are distinc difference between TQM and Six Sigma along my experience implement Six Sigma and TQM in my company. We have implement TQM for long time as continuous improvement method but now since we have implement Six Sigma as newest perspective than TQM we have gain spectaculer benefit that could not achived by TQM.One factor that have important  role is its top down insted of TQM, Top management Commitment that strictly  to succesfull result, time bound instead of continuos improvement, its breakthrough instead of step by step method, and ist trully powerfull crossfunctional perspective.

    0
    #89441

    Gordon Staples
    Participant

    TQM can not by definition be a failure. There’s no way to ‘do’ either ‘quality’ or ‘management’, other than totally. If it’s not totally done, it will not work and will not give the results.  The idea of 6 Sigma or TQM or CQI is to institutionalise the different way of working, making the different way of working a habit.  Pretending that ISO 9000, TQM, CQI, 6 Sigma et al require something different from the normal things we should be doing to run the businesses is all right but suggesting that it is a package that we can use as an option or that we can apply every alternate Wednesday is way off the mark and will guarantee failure or very poor results.  Management can not delegate responsibility for ensuring TQM , CQI, 6 Sigma etc works .  It may be that 6 Sigma lends itself more easily to measurement because of a propensity for its advocates to use numbers and stats when ordinary plain words may actually provide more evidence-based information.  However, unless the kind of leadership and commitment and involvement and example are shown by an organization’s management, all these initiatives are set to fail.  We have DFSS and DMAIC etc.  What we are seeing in many cases is DFF(Design for Failure).Nobody has yet invented yet the programme which guarantees success regardless of whether you follow its rules or not.
    If you have rules which are those which the stakeholders follow by choice, not because they are forced to, then perhaps that’s part of what is meant by ‘total’.
    No, quality-be it 6 Sigma quality, total quality, company-wide quality does not fail; people fail and are replaced; organizations fail and disappear.
    Gordon Staples  
      

    0
    #89449

    Dean Bottorff
    Participant

    The notion that 6s has succeeded where TQM has failed presumes a great deal and needs clarification. First, 6s has continuously adopted TQM methods over the years, so to say 6s is better than itself is in part a formal fallacy. Second, in spite of their similarities there does remain a key difference between 6s and TQM, and that is the concept of “total integration.” Rooted in Deming’s idea that a total integrated organizational performance is more important than improving isolated individual parts is what fundamentally sets TQM apart from 6s. 6s is a strategy of fixing “key” parts to improve the whole, and this is great much of the time.  However sometimes the sum of these parts do not add up to a better whole.  Deming’s “holistic and integrated whole” provides a more rigorous assurance of total organizational well being than 6s does. This is what the Baldrige Award is based on, and thus far I know of no other approach that has documented a stronger correlation with total fianacial performance as Wall Street’s “Baldie Play.” I have found that 6s does indeed improve the parts more efficiently and effectively than TQM, as this is what 6s is designed to do.  However TQM was designed to assure a better whole, leveraging the progress with the parts beyond their individual contributions. Are not both ideas important? Why does one have to necessarily be “better” than the other? Why do so many have to boost their practice by “putting down” other approaches? Which is more important, the rivalry between TQM and 6s ideas, or the betterment of our organizations? Based on imperical financial evidence, it appears that the incorporation of Deming’s integrated TQM can only improve the likelihood of 6s’s long term financial success.

    0
    #89454

    Reigle Stewart
    Participant

    Perhaps Six Sigma is looking more like TQM because
    more TQM consultants are now pushing Six Sigma.

    0
    #89455

    Reigle Stewart
    Participant

    I do recall a few years ago that several six sigma
    consultants were publically speaking out against six
    sigma, but now these same individuals (and consulting
    firms) try to make it seem they have always been for it.
    Some even try to say they were already doing six sigma
    years before it was even conceived!!!!! These
    “professionals” sure sound like politicians to me. This
    might make a really good thread someday … post the
    quotes of high profile consultants that used to promote
    TQM and then contrast those references to their current
    quotes about the merits of six sigma … much like a “before
    and after” snapshot.

    0
    #89507

    howe
    Participant

    Too many practitioners chased quality for quality’s sake.  I’ve recently read studies/articles which show that Baldridge winners haven’t fared so well.  They spent so much time trying to win the Baldridge that they forgot to run their business!

    0
    #89508

    Summerfield
    Participant

    TQM has traditionally tried to tackle large, complicated projects that prove to be too cumbersome to make any significant improvemements.  I think this is Six Sigma’s greatest advantage over TQM.  Six Sigma projects are typically more defined and properly scoped.  There may be several Six Sigma projects within one TQM project.  To use the baseball analogy, TQM always goes for the homerun….if you succeed, that’s great.  But the probability of success is much less.  Six Sigma goes for the singles…smaller projects with higher success rates.
    In addition, many companies did not have employees dedicated to doing TQM projects 100% of the time.  This is a guiding principle of Six Sigma.  Black Belts are assigned to 100% Six Sigma work.
     
     

    0
    #89652

    K Ganesh
    Participant

    TQM is a philosophy and a methodology. It is not prescriptive.It is applicable to all organizations and all types of projects. It would be wrong to say that this will ever die! Six Sigma is this philosophy packaged in a new way. It’s philosophy + methodology + techniques + tools. The success of Six Sigma is due to its outward in approach.

    0
    #89712

    ROSS
    Member

    It is incorrect to imply that TQM did not include “techniques + tools”. Kaoru Ishikawa is known for his saying that “The seven Quality Tools, if used skilfully, will enable 95% of workplace problems to be solved” – 1989. The same is probably true today. I feel the success of Six Sigma is largely due to the greater commitment of senior management.

    0
    #91921

    Montigue Norman
    Participant

     Companies that implement SixSigma and TQM end up moving their operations to slave labor countries.
    SixSigma is a success to widget managers that have no understanding of the inner workings of the products that their companies produce because most of their management is brain dead. Brain dead due to the loss of intuition and free thinking. Non-stop crises implementation in order to bring about change will yield a totally brain dead manager in 7 to 10 months.
    Continuous improvement is code for continuous layoff.
    SixSigma is the breading ground for artificially inseminated “Consensus” beliefs that eventually produces lower wages for non-management.
    SixSigma Blackbelt? What an idiotic title. Lets see, a SixSigma blackbelt should be able to beat up 25 guys at the same time and a SixSigma greenbelt should only be able to beat up 10 guys at the same time.
    Remember back in the mid 90’s when Motorola was bragging about SixSigma and its Cellular Subscriber Group manufacturing in the Northwest Suburbs of Chicago? Motorola cut thousands of  those jobs and moved their manufacturing to China. Gee Whiz, ain’t SixSigma great?

    0
    #91926

    Mikel
    Member

    Montigue,
    Two things –
    1) Get your facts straight. Motorola lost most of its market in cell phones – this causes loss of jobs in Chicago and China. Nothing to do with Six Sigma, just arogance of leaders who thought they defined the customer’s needs.
    2) What would you suggest in lieu of what you have criticized here? It is easy to run your mouth, it is harder to have solutions. Do you have some?

    0
    #91927

    Stacy B.
    Member

    Stan,At the union based manufacturing company for which am employed, I participated in the Green Belt training program.  My projcet was immensely successful, I  reduced cycle time and made modifications to the process that produced dramatic savings and reduced the number of operators required to  to complete the processs. My reward was the elimination of my own job.Since I am an union employee, the company moved  me to another department within our infrastructure and asssigned another project to me.  My dilemna is that I see ways to accomplish the same things mentioned in my first project, and that scares me.  With a lay-off based on senority, how long before I am sent home.  The Six Sigma methodology is an excellent means of a company to reduce costs and perform tasks more efficiently.  However, I believe that if the toolset is properly used, the end result will always be the loss of jobs!

    0
    #91930

    DaveG
    Participant

    Stacy,
    Increased efficiency can lead to staff cuts, but it is not a guaranteed outcome.  Some companies value their employees enough to ensure that the extra resources are consumed by extra demand (I don’t know which companies, but I hope they exist!).  Anyway, why do you base your livelihood on a horrible cancer (a union) which prevents meritocracy and certainly prevents a talented person like you from excelling?

    0
    #91939

    Mikel
    Member

    Stacy,
    I am truely sorry about your experience. If your management had their heads on straight, people would never loss their jobs because of Six Sigma.
    This is about efficiency and gaining market share – not sending a head out the door.
    Don’t shoot the toolset, shoot the idiot management (figuratively of course, not literally).

    0
    #91940

    Mikel
    Member

    Dave,
    Nice message until the cancer part. Most companies that have unions have done somrthing to deserve them. In a union environment, where there is trust, these problems don’t happen.
    You should look at psychology for a better understanding of this. Union is a sense of family and this is important to most workers (including me). Unions provide what companies are too stupid or arrogant to provide.

    0
    #91942

    Monti
    Participant

    Arrogance of leaders who thought they defined customer’s needs? Try arrogance of leaders that couldn’t care less about employees that invest their hearts and souls into their company. Motorola Cellular Subscriber Group built a huge manufacturing plant in Libertyville IL in 1992. Then built another plant in Harvard IL in 1995. They moved production out of Libertyville to Harvard in 1996 and 1997. Rumors were flying around the plant in Liberyville that they were going to China and would lay everyone off after they worked the bugs out in Harvard, seeing how Harvard would be a practice run. I feel these rumors were deliberately leaked as part of the “Leak it, Deny it, Do it” layoff stategy corporations use. The plan to move to China was in effect long before Motorola lost its market share in cell phones.
    Motorola pioneered SixSigma. Everything in Libertyville’s TDMA/Digital Mobile plant was documented and studied using SixSigma. Even their food court had a Mission Statement and Vision Statement on their cups. They sucked the life out of a lot talented, hard working, decent people in order to move it all to China. Paying workers in China near slave wages in order to afford higher quality components is the same kind of quality policy plantation owners used in the 1840’s.
    Try going down to the factory floor of your SixSigma/TQM company, pick up a manufacturing instruction, and start working at a station for a ten hour shift. See what little job satisfaction these people have. See how little they are thought of in the grand scheme of things. Learn the tricks technicians and operators use to get around all the metrics. Learn that the honest employees with talent leave, and the cheaters and low talent number mongers stay. Learn how any money saved by squeezing the operators will be wasted on totally idiotic capital expenditures. See why employees, stated in the movie “Office Space”, “work just hard enough to not get fired”.
    The personal solution is to denounce all “relative truth” based psychological group control techniques and embrace an honest Apprentice/Journeyman relationship.
    Remember that the typical lifespan of a TQM/Delphi Technique/SixSigma company in one place is only eight years.

    0
    #91943

    DaveG
    Participant

    Stan,
    I fully admit I took the low road on that one, and your comment about why unions exist is one I will absorb.  However, I can’t imagine how anyone could do better in a union environment than a meritocracy, de ceteris parabus.
    What aspects of psychology should I investigate?
    P.S.  Do you work for a battery manufacturer in upstate New York?

    0
    #91946

    Ludvig
    Participant

    Bravo, Gordon !  Two months have gone on since you send your viewpoint and it seems nobody has had any arguments to rebut your opinion.  Regards.

    0
    #91947

    muhannad al nabulsi
    Participant

    To summerize,I would like to say”Six-SIGMA is the “american” version of the “Japanese” TQM concept.I think the Japanese are preparing a new modified version of “JIT” as counter-attack and so on…..Six Sigma is TQM  with more emphasis on CS and ” tools using” minus Philosophy,it is more business oriented,with less regard to”humanitarian”issues and more focusing “technical”matters.
         Just my opinion,regards to you all.    Muhannad

    0
    #91949

    DaveG
    Participant

    Gordon,
    If there is an award for Best Post of the Year, this one is a candidate.

    0
    #91951

    Ludwig
    Participant

    I WOULD TOO…..

    0
    #91965

    Mikel
    Member

    Look at behavior predictors – specifically for process orientation on this one. An overwhelming number of union folks are patient, step 1 before step 2 kind of folks. You will find these folks also value belonging over monetary gains (you are called a brother – not a coincidence).
    No batteries for me – I run a couple of small service companies and do a little consulting on the side (only for companies I really believe in).

    0
    #91966

    Mikel
    Member

    I would have to agree with you – it definitely is an opinion.

    0
    #91976

    Ron
    Member

    I feel that the items you emphasized as the difference between TQM and Six Sigma are Huge!
    That is why Six sigma is still here and TQM was a nice “initiative”

    0
Viewing 27 posts - 1 through 27 (of 27 total)

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