Key performance indicators for BBs and GBs

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Key performance indicators for BBs and GBs

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
  • #32458

    Sabrina Brown

    We have already identified our Black Belt and Green belts for our company and we will be including their roles in their respective performance appraisals as part of their key result areas.   Are there samples of key performance indicators identified on how they are going to be rated in terms of their performance as BB and GBs?


    Chinh Hoang

    Simply, the performance measure indicators need to be S.M.A.R.T, depending on wherether they are full time or part time BB/GB and your company business objectives, giving them to complete a number of projects with deliverables and hard saving per projects. In addition, coaching/leading and develop team skills is also essential indicator of leadership behavious  of a BB/GB.
    Hope this helps.
    good luck,



    1. Achievement of projected financial benefit for assigned projet
    2. Finishing project within timeline or as scheduled
    3. Extent of action plan implementation
    4. Value adding activities, like coaching, leading, facilitating, conducting GB trainings (for BB)…


    Sigma Singh

    I am not too keen on including savings / project as a KPI for individual BBs. Saving result do not have any correlation with the rigour needed in a project. However savings / project can definitely be a KPI for the six sigma at initiative level.
    For individuals you may like to keep a tab on instances when project after completion has tended to go back to original state (lack of control) in adition to no of projects, adherence to time schedule, project selection likage to corporate objective etc.


    Matt M

    Each BB/GB is measured on their project success (primary metric) and their overall Six Sigma contribution:
    – # of completed projects/# goal projects
    – actual metric success/goal
    – financial success/goal
    – project velocity (time required)/goal
    Avg the final percentages:
    <92% – below expectations
    92-98 – approaches expectations
    98-100 – meets expectations
    100-100 – above expectations
    >110 – exceeds expectations


    Mike Carnell

    I tried not to get to wrapped up in this until I saw some of the responses. Before you set targets for the BB/GB’s you need to understand how they are going to be supported. If you take the best BB that there is in GE and put them in the middle of a bunch of slugs the performance will turn to crap.
    You need to look at how you will evaluate the BB’s in the environment you provide for them to work in. Take a look at how many posts occur around BB/GB’s working with Champions who are not engaged. BB/GB’s who are assigned poor projects, etc.
    It is a company that has a very superficial understanding of the SS system that thinks they will evaluate a BB/GB in a vacumn. They are a function of the quality of the environment they are given to work in.
    As far as $ saving s per project that is a function of project selection – that should be a Champion metric since they should be selecting the projects. Using a single number of projects to complete in a year can blow up on you since it doesn’t distinguish between the complexity of projects.
    You are playing with the factors that are going to determine the success of your program and it looks like it is being treated as an afterthought. If that is the case you need to take the program apart now before you screw up some peoples careers.
    Good luck.


    Systems Thinker

    Identifying how staff will be evaluated is important, but I would suggest that it must be done with a very clear understanding of the system in which the individuals work. 
    Setting KPIs that measure achievement of financial objectives per project or the number of projects completed, in an organization that does not aggreessively drive successful identification and completion of significant projects will be counter productive.  If the six sigma initiative is well integrated into the corporate culture and the employees do not face barriers at every turn, those types of KPIs may be appropriate.  If, on the other hand, the organization is just getting started with their initiative and there has not yet been a clear demonstration that projects will succeed, holding black belts responsible for a task that the system of work (organizational culture, politics, acceptance of significant change, etc.) does not support is a bad idea.
    In the latter situation, I would suggest measuring both black and green belts in things over which they do have the ability to impact, such as: effective selection and application of tools across the various stages of a DMAIC project, demonstrated proficiency in pulling together and “running” a project team, effectiveness of communication w/ champions, sponsors, stake holders and team members across the life of the project, etc.
    Dr. Deming’s “Out of the Crisis” and Peter Senge’s “Fifth Discipline” and /or “Fifth Discipline Field Book”  would add tremendously to your body of knowledge surrounding the answer to your question.  Leaders are readers!
    I sincerely hope this helps.



    We use the following criteria (ranked in order of importance) to evaluate performance of job responsibilities:
    1. Team Facilitation/Leadership
    2. Project Management (project depth and documentation, milestone and stakeholder reviews, implementation planning and execution)
    3. Technical Competence
    4. Communication Skills
    5. Value Added Service (taking initiative to perform additional tasks above and beyond requirements in order to benefit the organization)
    6. Business Expertise
    7. Administrative Ability (planning, organizing and decision making)



    Well said Mike! Without understanding the BB/BG’s work environment, we can’t even begin to assess the individual. An absolute all-star caliber “belt” can be thwarted by a dysfunctional organization. I know of a stellar individual who was told by his former employer that his skill added no value to the organization.
    Goes a long way to validating Deming’s opposition to performance reviews.


    Marc Richardson

    Step One: abolish performance appraisals. They are demoralizing and demeaning. Any PA system rewards so-called top-performers. In any business, half the people will be above average and the other half will be below. Develop your people’s performance with training, training and more training to raise the average of the performance of everyone in the entire company. Performance appraisals unfairly reward the upper half and punish the lower half. It is yet another form of sub-optimization; optimizing a portion of the system at the expense of the whole. See Deming’s 14 poiunts, especially point number 12 in Out of the Crisis.
    Marc Richardson
    Sr. Q.A. Eng.

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)

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