iSixSigma

Origins of Six Sigma

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Origins of Six Sigma

Viewing 100 posts - 101 through 200 (of 240 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #111808

    Jamie Lynn
    Participant

    Mike,
    I read your letter and it was very heartfelt and touched me deeply.  I was also somewhat disappointed to see someone questioning how old I was, this is a forum for Six Sigma, not about a person’s identity.  why is it so hard to believe that I am 14?
    Warm Regards,
    Jamie

    0
    #111822

    Dayton
    Member

    Dialect Codependent,
     
    Let’s hope that Darth’s interventional therapy is immediate, successful, group, and medicinally (Schedule II) concentrated.   Albeit an interesting analysis of syntax on your part, sorry to disappoint, but I am neither Dog Sxxt nor Reigle and have never posted as either.  I have neither Dog Sxxt’s unique flair for commentary or Reigle’s devotion to cause.  Various dead but nonetheless highly contributory mathematicians remain my posting preference.   Vinny is short for Vincenzo Viviani. 
     Vinny

    0
    #111823

    McD
    Participant

    “But I’ve been here in Michigan for 17 years.  Still think it’s too cold.”
    “I’m consulting off site Monday,”
    Well, it’s Monday, and there is plenty of sneaux here in the middle of the mitten.  I hope you don’t have nearly as much down south for your trip off site!
    And it is way too cold here!  I never could understand how this place got settled before the invention of Styrofoam®.
    –McD
     
     

    0
    #111824

    McD
    Participant

    “why is it so hard to believe that I am 14?”
    Jamie, you should take it as a compliment.
    In an age where few college graduates can string together two coherent sentences, your postings are articulate and well considered. 
    On top of that, the Internet seems to bring out the worst in people, and I’m sure you have seen many childish rantings on this site.  Your posts are to the point, and not excessively emotional.  Sure, we can see you care about your grandfather, as you should.  But that is appropriate, and not the sort of overreaction we see all too often.
    Most posters just aren’t expecting the maturity or the literacy from someone so young.
    –McD
     

    0
    #111825

    Markert
    Participant

    Wow, Mike R.:
    In the choice between ignore and respond, I guess this time I’ll respond.
    You’ve been the new guy here for what, six minutes, and already we know your whole life story and you’ve developed so many personal, emotional posts……..and perhaps this was one of them.
    Darth and Vinny, I’ve gotten much clarity from you(s).  Phil… I certainly hope you are just an evil alter ego, but I sadly sense that you are real.  Lighten up dude.  Let’s have some banter, not so much belligerence.
    Having said that….to include me in your macro-comments, apparently heartfelt as they were, about your impression of of what you believe from a couple of observations. Since you’ve opened the door with your frequent inclusion of your faith, I’ll ask you this: WWJD, or WWJ have done differently in a personal observation of me? No hard fellings.. :-)

    0
    #111827

    Stevo
    Member

    Jamie Lynn, this is just my opinion and as I stated in numerous other posting, I not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree. 
     
    I think your granddaddy has received a lot of credit for Six Sigma.  I say that because the tools and ideas were nothing new, they have been around for years.  He took advantage of a lot of others ideas and successes and added value to them, not an uncommon practice with great people.
     
    If you could rewrite the story, what would you like to see?
     
    If I sound rude, I apologize.
     
    Stevo
     

    0
    #111841

    Mike R. aka Dialect Coach
    Participant

    I only heard one who doubted you.  He thinks you’re too good to be true. 
     
    I agree.
    Mike 

    0
    #111842

    Mike R. aka Dialect Coach
    Participant

    And why should anyone believe anything you post, Mr. Viviani (which SHOULD have two “n’s” at the end, if you’re not lying again).
    Go back to therapy.
    Hey, solve this one.  If the project is too big (i.e. inputs are processes rather than measurables in the detailed process map), how do you scope the project.  Dollar savings or available team member resource list?  What is important here?  You tell me.  I think I know.  Stan?
    Mike

    0
    #111843

    Mike R.
    Participant

    It was a drag south of Detroit, thanks.
    Gotta see a galvanizing plant and a steel rod manufacturer today thiugh.  What a thrill.  Cool indeed (no pun).
    They are interested in length variation at one of these places.  Can you imagine a better Y?
    Love ya,
    Mike

    0
    #111844

    Mike R.
    Participant

    If God wasn’t already working on you, you wouldn’t have asked.
    On pride:  I do not fear what I see that  can do well. (I recognize my gifts and love ’em).  
    HOWEVER, I take absolutely no credit for them.  I don’t THINK I took credit for my abilities in Six Sigma or anything else, but being human and emotional, a post may have said that.  For the record, I am a conduit for God’s truth, at my best.  At my worst, I’m about as prideful as anyone, or more so.  WWJD?  A lot better than me!  What do I try to do?  Accept myself, BOTH good and bad.   Read “Freedom of Simplicity”, Richard Foster, Chapter 6 especially. 
    On judging:  “Hate the sin, not the sinner” is a common mantra for me and others.  I hate my sin more than anything outside me, because I foolishly expect to control it all the time.  Not possible, obviously.  In this entire 6-day tirade, my primary regret is in labeling YOU rather than your behaviors.  You are not a “know-it-all” (noun), simply one who acts with seemingly shameless acrimony (verb).  You are not ANYTHING, actually, other than a son of God, like it or not, and have a choice, as we all do, to act like a saint or an ass.  Previous behavior (true also in statistics) has no predictive capability for future performance in an uncontrolled situation such as life.  Feel free to adjust your role in life daily, per God’s instructions, and without regard to popular opinion.  Welcome to the ultimate truth of personal soverignty: We are only free through total servitude to an ultimately just Master.  Heavy, huh?
    I certainly have no hard feelings. :-)   Thank you for your note.  I was very humbled that you, who obviously have a great deal of passion and intelligence, would write to me about “truth”.   You played your role perfectly, as we all do.  God has you right where he wants you.  Without you, I might not have had a chance to share my faith with this small community.
    That said, I am nothing more than a struggling prophet, sometimes on, often off.  To all, sorry to be so “off the beaten path”.  I just happen to think that this stuff has a lot more to do with successful Six Sigma than Minitab, most of the time (except for multiple regression, maybe).
    Mike
     
     

    0
    #111846

    Dayton
    Member

    Mike R. AKA Dialect Coach,
     
    No Mike, you are in error again.  The name is indeed spelled Vincenzo Viviani.  It does not have two “n’s” at the end as you stated.  Perhaps you should research before you post.   Just a thought.  
     
    And gee whiz, “liar”?   That’s pretty harsh.  I think that’s the first time someone has been accused of that in the forum.  Sure… cheat, con artist, con man, deceiver, deluder, dissimulator, equivocator, fabler, fabricator, fabulist, false witness, falsifier, fibber, jive turkey, maligner, misleader, perjurer, phony, prevaricator, promoter, storyteller, or trickster……. but “liar”?   That hurt.  And, I must say, that’s not how you make friends on the forum – or more than likely elsewhere.     
     Vinny

    0
    #111848

    Mike R.
    Participant

    I was not calling you a liar, simply identifying you as one who lied (misrepresented your identity.. what would you call that?).
    Regarding my ability to research, I stand as charged.  I don’t.  I know next to nothing about romance language spelling patterns.  In questioning your offering of a surname, I was simply reacting with prejudice to previous indiscretions and 4 of 4 friends with that pattern in their names, all with 2x n’s.
    Are you REALLY saying that you are to be taken at face value from this point?  If so, I forgive you unconditionally, even if you’re not apologizing, and will look forward with unreserved anticipation to future posts.  I really have learned from you, in spite of the more recent distractions.
    However, this all is WAY too much about us (Phil, Vinny, ShxtDog, Mike R.).  Let’s release these threads back those thirsty for Six Sigma  clarity.
    Sincerely, Mike

    0
    #111849

    Dayton
    Member

    Mike R. AKA Dialect Coach,
     
    You were right on target with that one and I commend you once again.   When you titled your response “Uncle” – I thought again, “How does he do it?  What elegant logic.”  
     
    I am your uncle, Uncle Vinny, the product of a brief but memorable union with your aunt Maude in Atlantic City a few years ago.  It is great to hear from you, I hope the family is well and that Maude has gotten over her somewhat debilitating allergies.   As far as your faithful acceptance at face value of postings in anonymous technical forums in general and me in particular – yes, let me suggest that you continue to do so without qualms and/or reservations.   Please plan on bringing the family over for dinner during the holidays (and, of course, bring Maude if she’s able to travel).
     
    Yours in familial fondness and the ongoing pursuit of truth in advertising,
     Uncle Vinny  (with two “n’s”)

    0
    #111850

    Judd Nelson
    Participant

    You forgot ugly, lazy and disrespectful…

    0
    #111851

    Mike’s Uncle Vinny…
    Participant

    Thanks Judd.  I wasn’t trying to list my personal attributes and shortcomings, just things that might have been attributed to forum postings in general.   But Mike R.’s posting was about me so I’ll add ugly, lazy, disrespectful and web-footed. 
     Mike’s Uncle Vinny

    0
    #111858

    Markert
    Participant

    Vinny:
    Once again, you prove yourself magnanimous beyond compare….To take ownership of those words must have required a round of “sticks and stones can break my bones……just before a chorus of the Sponge Bob theme song. Kudos to you. 
    I’m just SWAG’in it, but let’s set the wayback machine travel and science fans, for the late 1970s and sort through the combo platter that Judd Nelson has served up.
    Could Judd Nelson really be Judd Hirsch; and instead of Vinny was Judd thinking about…{drum roll}
    Loveable, yet ugly, lazy, and disrespectful “TAXI” manager Louie DePalma, played by that highly respected and talented actor Danny DeVito?
    Or is it possible there some kind of bipolar television random act of transfered television consolidation confusion going on where Vinny Barboroso from another sitcom of that time made a guest appearance in the movie “Breakfast Club”?
    Help us Judd….

    0
    #111859

    Mike R.
    Participant

    That is just SO WIERD.  What are the chances of finding lost relatives on the forum?… wait, that’s a probability problem… I’ll ask Stan.
    How fondly I remember the stories Aunt Maude used to tell about you.  Boy did dad get mad.  He never mentioned you by name, just called you “that four-faced stats geek.  Maude never quite got over you.  Se sends her love. 
    I always hoped I’d meet you one day.  This is hardly a heart-warming reunion, but oddly, it’s quite enough.  Do you still have that wandering eye, or did you finally have the surgery.  Just wondering.
    [email protected] if you ever want to chat without all the hype and pomp.  Six Sigma only.  I’m too busy for all this drama.
    Your nephew, Mike 
    P.S. Likewise Darth/Stan/Adam/Jamie Lynn/Mcd feel free to write anytime.

    0
    #111863

    Mikel
    Member

    Phil,
    This just in – Detroit based Six Sigma consultant fired for confusing views on Christianity with Six Sigma.
    Islamic customer in Dearborne outraged by DMAIC being changed to DMAIBA.

    0
    #111872

    Mike R.
    Participant

    What nonsense.

    0
    #111873

    Mike R.
    Participant

    Bla Bla Bla me me Stan.
    Stan want’s to say “When I said that, you said…”
    “Flippancy is the hallamrk of constipated prejudice.”
    True.  Consider me prejudiced and flippant.  From you, it’s a compliment.

    0
    #112758

    rkpadhy
    Member

    Dear Jamie Lynn,
    I have listened some of the speeches of Bill Smith recorded .It was shown by Prof Noshir Khory at New Delhi,India,who was in Motorola.Can I get the cassettes and where I will get it.
    I am a consultant working in this area and swear by Bill Smiths phillosophy.
    rkpadhy

    0
    #112793

    Jamie Smith
    Participant

    rkpadhy,
    I have no clue where you can get the cassettes you are talking about, maybe you should look on an online bookstore or something.

    0
    #114769

    Robert Delamontagne
    Member

    Can anyone provide a reference?  I am interested in obtaining a copy of the first book that was written about Six Sigma.  Thanks.

    0
    #114771

    Mikel
    Member

    That would be the Mikel Harry white cartoon book – ISBN 0-9643555-2-3 copyright 1994.
    I have a case of them in my barn.
    From the Amazon website – a review
    Powerpoint in Disguise, February 24, 2003Reviewer: A readerRubbish, pure rubbish. This is a cartoon-like collection of powerpoint slides masquerading as a book. If anyone actually pays money for this (like my company did), they deserve to lose the money. Congratulations Dr. Harry (a doctor of what, exactly?) you made some more money on this collection of slides.Was this review helpful to you? 

    Report this)” );
    //–>

    ( Report this)
    (Report this)

    0
    #114773

    Darth
    Participant

    I recommend that you take the case of Harry books out of the Barn and put them in the basement along with your fine wine collection.  In the proper environment, the books will age and become more palatable and easier to swallow.  At least that works with wine and tequila so I am assuming it works just as well for SS books.  If I am wrong, they will likely turn to vinegar.

    0
    #114775

    Mikel
    Member

    I keep one each of Dr. Mikel’s fine works in my office at all times. I pull one down to read occasionally and unlike Dr. Deming’s, the more I know the more rediculous Dr. Harry’s BS is.
    I am hoping for them to age to the consistency of fine toilet paper – this will increase their value by at least a few orders of magnitude. As it is, I’d have to ship them to Kiev to sell them as toilet paper.

    0
    #114779

    Habib
    Participant

    Stan,
    why do you make it a point to ridicule people?

    0
    #115234

    Jay Jagannathan
    Participant

    Lets give real credit where due and not take away the achievements that ought to be appreciated by consultants and implementers of six sigma.. bill where ever u r .. congratulations man.. the world would not have been the same with out six sigma..
    Jay Jagannathan
    CEO:  AMMIJAY SOLUTION (PTY) LTD
    Botswana

    0
    #115235

    Dear Jay,
    Please give my regards to Precious Ramotswe in Gaborone ..
    Cheers,
    Andy
    Cambridge, England

    0
    #115236

    Betty Smith
    Participant

    Thank you so much Jay for your kind comments about Bill Smith  He was my husband and unfortunately died 11 years ago.  He would be very pleased to know that his ideas have become so far-reaching.
                                             Sincerely,
                                           Betty Ann Smith                                  

    0
    #115261

    Dog Sxxt
    Participant

    Do you need to promote your company in this forum by manipulating Bill’s reputation??

    0
    #115808

    Sarfraz
    Member

    I really impressed by theory

    0
    #116051

    Akinyemi Akingbade
    Participant

    Since the theory itself is based on the statistical work of Joseph Juran, a Japanese pioneer of quality management, he could equally be referred to as the originator.

    0
    #116057

    Tronan
    Member

    I reply to this without reading the entire thread.
    Best I heard yet on the origin’s of SS was the caveman.
    We have been continuously improving ever since.
    T.
    24.65

    0
    #116061

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    AA,
    Where in the world di you ever get the idea that Joseph Juran was Japanese?
    You need to read the book. He drew the difference between Breakthrough and Control – the tactics. The originator of the concept was Bill Smith. That part is well documented.
    Good luck.

    0
    #123462

    BilliBob
    Participant

    Geez, enough with the Bill Smith stories.  Don’t you every rest?  What a drone…
    B

    0
    #131479

    Brian C Carter
    Participant

    I have never quit understood all of the hype of  Six Sigma , the Black Belt, Green Belt stuff . Has not the statistical tools, such as SPC, Cpk, Zero defects, process analysis, ect. alwasy been there to acomplish the same means.  Once the variation was in controll. Then you applied whatever tool, Cpk,  Zero defects, , ect. to tighten the varaiation even more,  if the product, customer or process requested it to be so. Has not this always been the proper methodogy to process inprovement, which leads me to believe that the Six Sigme hype is just a marketing ploy. Or am I missing something here. Please advise.
    Brian C Carter

    0
    #131485

    Mikel
    Member

    You are right

    0
    #131488

    Hhon the stupid
    Participant

    Agree

    0
    #131510

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Brian C Carter,
    Superficially the answer to your question, at least a portion of it, is yes the tools have always been there. The same tools, at least a portion of them, were there before TQM as well. That should lead someone to understand, as long as they are taking more than a superficial look, that what is going on with the success of Six Sigma means that it is not tool related.
    Since you have surmised that it is a marketing ploy exactly what was the advantage to Galvin, Bossidy and Welch to engage the initiative purely for marketing reasons. Do you suppose that all of us in the SS consulting business send these guys a check monthly for their endorsement of the procvess? I can’t speak for most but I do not. Why do they continue to write about it in books since their retirement? They don’t write about what a great thing t tests are but they do write about the success of the SS initiative. Maybe it isn’t the tools?
    If you take the time to understand what is going on you will see that SS is a structured methodology no a grab bag of statistical tools. If this was purely about tools then the solution would be to hire statisticians to come in and fix your company. We have all seen that fail repeatedly. The basic strategy is taking the “Best of the Best” (which I do not necessarily agree with) and training them as “belts.” What I do agree with is taking people inside the organization who are recognized as having expertise in a process i.e. marketing, purchasing, etc. and giving them a structured approach – not necessarily in terms of tools but in terms of understanding of their process so that they have something that forces them to understand their process in a new and different way. They will begin to ask new questions and therefor derive new solutions. Some like to pontificate on SS killing creativity – I see it drive it more frequently than it kills it.
    If you don’t particularly care for that answer then answer this. There are some big numbers reported as results. Some like tyo say they are nonsense. My last deployment was audited twice by major consulting firms and both agreed that the saving were understated (we roughly tripled the expected number after clearing cost and gave away another $13,000,000 rather than fight about who did what and we primarily drove revenue rather than cut cost). Since these tools have been in the hands of people for so long what kind of benefit has been driven over that period of time?
    It is a simple matter of a business decision based on ROI not who knew what tool when.
    Just my opinion.
    Good luck.

    0
    #131512

    Cone
    Participant

    Mike,
    You are way too nice. It must be the season.
    I would just tell the guy he is right because he hasn’t really taken any time to understand.
    Have a great holiday. I hope you have a chance to get to the warm waters south of mainland Florida. Have a rum drink for me, but not one with an umbrella.

    0
    #131513

    Jered Horn
    Participant

    Mike,
    You’re awesome.  Guys like you TRUELY give Six Sigma a good name.  Keep it up!
    Jered

    0
    #131514

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Gary,
    Thank you. I hope you and the family have a safe and Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
    Won’t see Florida this Christmas but Mozambique right after the first of the year. We will toast you at least once with rum and no umbrellas.
    Regards

    0
    #131515

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Jered,
    Thank you for the compliment.
    Have a great and safe holiday season.
    Regards

    0
    #131534

    Dog Sxxt
    Participant

    This is another academic conjecture. In another word, you do not understand all happenings in the real life. You are very right to say such tools have been there long before six sigma mania.
    I had been working with a number of US companies, some of them embraced six sigma after GE’s six sigma mania. What are differences for BEFORE and AFTER six sigma ?(from the perspective of US companies only)
    Before six sigma.
    – Such tools are not systematically taught to people who need them. My former company sent a batch of senior managers to Professor TN Goh’s DOE class and as expected none of them used DOE after the training. 
    The bloody fact is the enginners need such training, and not those stupid senior managers. I as a junior engineer at that time was singled out from DOE training because I was no senior (or senile) enough to qualify for DOE training.
    – Although you label these tools are common, but the fact is these tools are NEW to most people in non-six sigma companies. Your common sense is not  always common sense to others. People in  the companies have to play jigsaw puzzle to make these tools work for them.
    How many of them have such capability, resources and time to choose the right tools from the toolbox?
    – Improvement projects are not selected from the customer viewpoints. Usually is the Department Head sets the goals arbitrarily or sometimes no even has clear goals. Fire fighting approach are very common. When come to annual performance review, it all depending on the boss like you or not and our performance appraisal is not based on the true results.
    – No project follow-up and review. The boss can switch off and on a project at anytime depending on “pressure” from the top.  
    – Engineers are treated like mad dogs. Engineers have to take care daily line performace maintenance and can only spend part-time to address management driven variation issues. 
    – I as a process engineer had to release bad parts to customer as instructed by MD. Releasing bad part is a norm in the company. No quality culture to stop the defect and addressing the root cause for once and forever.
    – No standard improvement methodology based on statistical thinking. PDCA is not fully understood and accepted. I did see a senior manager from Failure Analysis Lab took one piece part as sample size. Amazingly his FA report is a few pages thick with all colorful printouts. 
    More bad habits to make a company at 2 or 3 sigma level performance. You just figure out yourself this kind of company can survive in the cut-throat competition or not.
    I do not need to highlight AFTER six sigma scenarios. Imagine opposite scenarios to get your answers.
    You do not need Six Sigma if you know some shortcomings I mentioned above and able to manage your company according to Deming and Juran’s TQM philosophy. 
    As a matter of fact that no so-called six sigma in Toyota or Honda.  Only what you do that matters to your survival, not the name of the program.
    But I do agree Six Sigma is becoming a marketing tool for consultants like me or many others. I do not mind to pay Jack Welch a check for his contribuation to make six sigma well-known to business people who can issue check to me.

    0
    #131536

    Darth”s Sister
    Participant

    Just  Excellent in-depth  wrapping  up.I  suggest to  write  2-3 pages  article for  publishing  in  the  forum.Do  you  have  any  short  presentation  (10-15 min.) to  be  used  to  convince  “stupid ” CEOs in this  regard:TO  start implementing  SS in  their  companies??thanks

    0
    #131539

    Peppe
    Participant

    MIke, very good explanation. Could be possible to know which improvement startegy was used by that company before implement sixsigma program ? Which % was the $13M on total business in a year ?
    Rgs, Peppe

    0
    #131557

    Dog Sxxt
    Participant

    May be later I can add in more bad habits found in these 3-sigma American companies like why ISO9000 failed miserablly; Industrial Engineering is not widely and proper used, gemba kanban and visual management is totally absent, disconnection between R&D and Manufacturing, etc.
    You have to prepare your own presentation to convince those stupid and old mindset CEOs after my free tips which you cannot find them in any textbook.
    The company I quoted frequently here is Seagate before Six Sigma journey. There is no more Seagate in this world if they did the same thing as before 1998. Seagate delisted from the public listing and embarked six sigma under a new management in 1998. Sometimes you have to fire all old dogs if you want to have a new face-lift in your company.
    Many Japanese companies already did “six sigma stuff” before Motorola invented “Six Sigma”. Six Sigma is just a repackaged TQM for American companies.
    Lean Six Sigma is also not a new invention as claim by many Western consultants.
    People call Six Sigma a new invention in 20th century because they do not know or intentionally disregard the history.

    0
    #131562

    GomezAdams
    Participant

    I could’nt agree with you more Dog!
    I bailed from GM after 20 years. Saw the handwriting on the wall.
    GM really did’nt think Toyota would ever come close as real competition in the CEO’s lifetime.
    They could have used that house cleaning you mentioned back in the 80’s.
     

    0
    #131563

    Flying Sigma Circus
    Participant

    Here’s another sad tale of American auto manufacturer dysfunction.  Ford was initially offered the partnership with Toyota, which ultimately became NUMMI-GM in Fremont, CA.  Toyota believed they should offer it to Ford, as Ford had helped them out significantly over the years.  My father went over to Japan with a team of people to see what they had.  Had was fascinated by the speed of changeovers, the lack of wasted effort, the sheer magnitude of teamwork and orchestration of the work processes.  The other team members were more impressed in the $1,500 per plate meals, cracking jokes and insulting their hosts.  After two days of this, he threatened to have the jerks sent home. 
    When he got back to Detroit and made his report out to the Duece and his band of senior management, they were like deer staring at the headlights.  After telling them that it would be a good deal for Ford to pursue the partnership, that Ford had much to learn from Toyota, they about laughed him out of the room.  The deal was killed.  Toyota made the deal with GM.  Even so, GM has not learned from Toyota, as they learned nothing from the early days of Saturn.  They will kill anything not like themselves.  For all their so called efforts to improve, the management structure does not support anything that does not fit within their own silos and ways of conducting business. “Runaway . . .”
     

    0
    #131564

    Dog Sxxt
    Participant

    GM’s fall has some lessons for manufacturing

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/gms-fall-has-some-lessons-for-manufacturing/2005/12/20/1135032016836.html#
     
    The structure that served it so well for so many years eventually blinded GM to the business environment it had to operate in, writes Ivan Deveson.HAVING started as a GM Holden manufacturing cadet ¡ª being awarded General Motors scholarships to Kettering and Stanford universities and living and working in five countries over 30 years ¡ª I, like many, am saddened by the speculation of possible GM bankruptcy, the closure of nine plants in North America, and the retrenchment of 30,000 employees.There are many factors behind this great company losing half its US market share, reporting billions of dollars of losses and watching its market capitalisation crash to $US12 billion ($A16 billion), compared with Google at $US112 billion.I want to outline a few of those factors as lessons for Australia, where our manufacturing sector is under siege, having fallen from 30 per cent of gross domestic product to about 12 per cent in recent years.An excess of vertical integration, where GM made many of the components it used, made the company blind to advances in competitive pricing and technology. Outsourcing was resisted for too long, with make-versus-buy comparisons constantly clouded by investments in bricks and mortar.Australian companies need to constantly compare their costs, quality and intellectual property against global competition.The traditional management/labour bargaining rounds of the 1950s through to the 1980s resulted in excessively high wages and benefits that rendered GM plants in the US uncompetitive with imports and with vehicles manufactured in “greenfield” US plants.So-called hard-earned conditions of employment can be a burden in the ever-changing global economy, particularly if they threaten business viability.Success breeds complacency ¡ª and some arrogance. When I visited Japan in the mid-1970s and saw the just-in-time and quick-die-change processes, I struggled to convince many of my Detroit colleagues that an economic tsunami was coming. Beating budget and being better than last year are irrelevant if you do not meet or beat world’s best practice.We understand this in sport, but have a lot to learn in trade and commerce.It took the US too long to establish a policy of encouraging foreign importers to build greenfields plants in the US.In the late 1970s, Japanese imports flooded the market. Baseball bats were used to beat up Toyotas in car parks as Americans lost their jobs.A 1.8 million vehicle “voluntary restraint” was negotiated and, later, a GM/Toyota joint venture was formed in California where the Japanese taught the Americans lean manufacturing.Today, the Japanese, Koreans and Europeans have about 20 best practice greenfield plants in the US. Toyota’s American operations employ about 200,000 Americans directly and indirectly.Australian authorities should be considering a similar concept as the Chinese and Indian automotive economic miracles unfold before our eyes.A variety of pressures caused GM to be so slow to act on its own production overcapacity, resulting in incentives to artificially stimulate sales.Alfred Sloan created an organisational structure in the 1920s that gave US consumers the opportunity to move up-market from a Chevrolet, through a Pontiac, Buick and Oldsmobile, to the ultimate Cadillac. It served the company well and was one of the keys to global leadership for 71 years.More recently, this structure created dysfunctional internal competition and duplication and prevented GM from developing the “quick-to-market” design capability that might have helped it cope with growing competition. The global economy demands optimum teamwork, streamlined bureaucracy and flexible organisational structures.China produced 5 million vehicles last year ¡ª they will reach 10 million by around 2010. They had 4 million university graduates in 2004, 350,000 engineering graduates and already have more people studying English than the US, Canada and Britain combined. They are developing global capability.Australia is breeding more internationalists and we now have 1 million Australians working overseas. But we have a way to go.We should hope GM president Rick Wagoner, his team, the leaders of the United Auto Workers union, dealers, suppliers and governments can find a way to rebuild the mighty GM.It needs a co-operative approach, not an adversarial one. Thousands of Australians have benefited from GM, including this kid from Coburg.Ivan Deveson is chairman of the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia and a veteran of more than 30 years with GM.

    0
    #131567

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Peppe,
    At the risk of sounding evasive, (but) until a customer takes information public I prefer not to give any details beyond what they have done.
    The $13M is something similar to what we discussed in an earlier thread. There are projects that get into suituations where some people feel it was a JDI, existing project, etc. Fighting over the benefit is a win/lose situation and I would rather just let the benefit go. We were blessed with a very talented group of belts that did a lot of very good work. They made their objectives plus some. It was better for the program in the long term to not get into a fight over who did what.
    When we deploy we go through an ownership transition after the first year. Although it is difficult to do real cause and effect analysis on any one decision it seems that not getting into a p___ing match over the benefits has realy left the belts in good standing with the rest of the organization in terms of being seen as a good resource rather than a group that is just trying to take all the glory. Ultimately that will help the longevity of the program. The Chief Strategy Officer has stepped up and promised 300M rand (approx 6.5 = 1USD) for next year (article in Forbes) so there is really no doubt to the Leaderships commitment to the program.
    There were some previous efforts around reengineering but I don’t really know the details around that. The current SS initiative is being pretty well integrated with other initiatives currently under way such as Shared Business Services and SAP.
    I hope this helped some. Sorry I couldn’t be more specific on some issues. There is a video available on the Lonmin website where Brad Mills, the CEO, is talking to some people from the financial community and makes some comments around the program.
    Regards

    0
    #131573

    Craig
    Participant

    I worked at Motorola for nearly 20 years.  What a blessing….thanks in great part to the Galvins! (and many many great co-workers).
    In my early years at Moto, I read quote by Shewhart and Deming that has long since stuck in my mind.
    “The long range contribution of statistics depends not so much upon getting lots of highly trained statisticians into the industry as it does in creating a statistically minded generation of physicists, engineers, and others who will have a hand in developing and directing the production processes of tomorrow”
    I think this in line with Bill Smith’s thinking, and it’s all about variation reduction, process control, reducing system complexity, reducing opportunities for error.  One of the trickle-down effects was raising the bar on our Cpk indices. I cringe when I hear people say that cpk is over-utilized, but that’s just my “geeky” nature I guess!
    Is it fair to say that the six sigma methodologies like DMAIC evolved because of Bill Smith, and not by Bill Smith? Whether he had a hand in the DMAIC process or not, he still is considered the father of six sigma in my book! I never met him, but he sure made the quote by Deming and Shewhart become a reality!!!
     

    0
    #134054

    Milind Sawant
    Participant

    Hi Praveen,
    please send me some info about your book on my mail id
    [email protected]
    Regards
    Milind Sawant

    0
    #135897

    Robert J. Marine
    Member

    A reply to Mr. Carnell, in answer to what may have been rhetorical questions:
    From Dr. Deming (after realizing the consulting value in the U.S.) through the current batch of TQ/CQ/PIM/SS gurus and consultants, yes, Mr. Carnell, they do market a programmatic package and earn money, even in their retirement from all but writing, by selling nicely worded and rehashed ideas that is neither “deep” nor owned by the people doing the processes.  Glossy packages with books and binders full of easily repeated, lofty sounding lines, gleefully “adopted” by senior managers who accurately see that the package is a useful symbol to present to a wide variety of people they want to impress with their and, supposedly, the company’s commitment to quality. 
    There are, indeed, many people who explore, investigate, research, learn and use methods that improve quality, with or without the overlay of a convenient package of publications, “tools,” buzz-words (“definitions”), and endless hours of “teams” looking for processes to improve followed by process action team meetings and presentations to senior management (for approval, of course).  These are the folks who are making their money doing and improving processes they care about without need of creating salable glossy programs.  At our team meetings, professional association and union meetings, we talk with our peers and share ideas about what works to monitor and improve our work.
    The packaged program elements have been the same since my earliest involvement in the late 1960’s, in wave after wave, and, not surprisingly, what is common to all and what survives the repeated passings of the consultant gurus, are the basic systems theory and process variance control data collection, analysis, and control mechanisms. 
    These take time and effort to learn and are not simple “adopted” solutions from a mandated program, but used by folks who take the time to get past labels and games played by people motivated by the lure of earning capital by selling a program (however the fundamentals are packaged and elements labeled in the current salable iteration of the consulting or corporate package). 

    0
    #135906

    tottow
    Member

    And your point is?

    0
    #135909

    Darth
    Participant

    There is no point.  He is just responding to an old thread like folks do now and then.  Or it took him this long to formulate his response.  Bet Carnell will be overjoyed to know people still care about what he says.

    0
    #135916

    tottow
    Member

    Actually, I doubt Carnell will give a fig about Mr. Marine, or what he said, or what he said about what he said.
    Sure was nice to see the eminent Dr. Vinny back on the forum, even if it was only for a single response.  If we could get he and Phil and that Arkansas redneck back on a regular basis I’d waste, oops I mean spend alot more of my time here again.

    0
    #135924

    Darth
    Participant

    Sing’in to the choir Bro!!!

    0
    #147733

    Sultan
    Member

    I really do understand your feelings.Because my Grandfather is scientist too there  many invention to his credit but was never recognized.This world is like this.They are what they are.
     
    Syed

    0
    #147749

    Jerome Finnigan
    Participant

    Bill  Smith  discovered  the  1.5 Sigma  shift
    Mikel  Harry has  created  the “belts” & MAIC concepts 

    0
    #147801

    Hal
    Participant

    Bill Smith did not “discover” 1.5.  You can’t “discover” something that doesn’t exist.  Read his paper.  He pulls it out of thin air without reference or justification.

    0
    #147803

    ex SME
    Participant

    Nonsense: Here is a post that discloses a different point of view:https://www.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=43982Posted by: ex SME
    Posted on: Tuesday, 13th April 2004, 1:42 PMI have heard enough undeserved credit being given to Mike Harry and Richard Schroeder, who claim they invented Six Sigma, the DMAIC methodology and the Black Belt concept. In reality, these concepts were first developed and implemented by Mario Perez-Wilson at Motorola in the Semiconductor Sector, where I used to work.Mario (as I knew him personally) came out with the idea of training and developing Statistical Methods Engineers (SME) to be coordinators on each facility of Motorola (PHX, C.E., METL, KLM, SBN, MPI, GDL, MKL) in 1987, when he started at Motorola Semiconductor. The SMEs were trained in the US by him for 6 months and some were trained in Malaysia by B. Rigg who reported to Mario. We were taught the M/PCpS methodology – the first DMAIC approach and Motorola’s Six Sigma methodology – and we had to implement it in engineering projects and characterisation studies. The projects were assigned to us before we started the training. We were responsible for the Six Sigma projects, the teams, couching, training, implementing and interfacing with the champions. We had monthly presentations, deliverables, responsibility and accountability. The SME approach for continuous improvement was brilliant, very methodical and worked great. Prior to him, we were using control charts for continuous improvement and occasionally we would do a DOE, GRRs were not even talked about.Mario’s methodology was a 5-Stage approach (you can see it at http://www.mpcps.com):1. Process Delineation
    2. Metrology Characterization
    3. Capability Determination
    4. Optimization
    5. ControlThe success of the SMEs was unbelievable in Motorola, we had saved millions of dollars already by 1991. These were the first truly Black Belts at Motorola. Prior to Mario Perez-Wilson working in Motorola Semiconductor, the implementation of continuous improvement was not methodical nor organized and we were fixing the same problems year after year. He changed all of that with his methodology and the SMEs approach.Then, years later, Mikel Harry claimed (circa 1994) his Six Sigma Methodology is called DMAIC, a 5-Phase approach.Look at the similarities between Mario’s 5-stage and DMAIC:1. Define
    2. Measure
    3. Analyze
    4. Improve
    5. ControlIf this is not a copy, I don’t know what is! How come Harry did not invented a 3-stage or 6-stage approach?How did Mikel Harry got all of this information to come up with DMAIC and the Black Belts?In 1991, Mario, Glenn Kirk and B. Rigg coordinated the first SME symposium in Seoul Korea (27-May-1991 – 31-May-1991), where we all presented the projects we were coordinating in our sites. Mario could not attend the symposium because he took a leave of absence from Motorola. Just prior to the symposium, B. Rigg invited Mikel Harry, who had become Director of Six Sigma Research Institute to the symposium, to witness what we were doing and to present his approach. His approach made no sense to us. He did not even talked about characterising gauges prior to collecting data. Most of the stuff he presented we had been doing for years already, and it was a disaster. He then criticize everything we did and started bad mouthing Mario. Nothing positive came out of his mouth. It was very counterproductive. During his presentations we asked him tough questions and he could not answer. Months later we were told his PhD was in psychology and not in engineering. No wander he could not answer our questions.Later on, Mikel Harry announces they are doing some publications with Motorola University and the Six Sigma Research Institute and we are asked to change our presentations to fit his format otherwise the projects would not be published. It bothered me, because they took out all references to M/PCpS, which is what started all the projects of improvement in the first place. But, they missed erasing one reference of M/PCpS, which is proof of my account.At the end of the SME Symposium, we were all given the proceedings, a two-inch thick book with all the characterisation studies and improvement projects we presented. This is another proof (data) of my account.Our entire efforts as SMEs, fell under the success story of the Six Sigma Research Institute and Mikel Harry, when in reality, Harry nor the Institute contributed in any way, shape or form to our success. Later, we were asked to go through the Black Belt training program and they taught stuff we already knew and gave us roles we already had.I kept a few copies of the SME Symposium Proceedings. If anybody wants a copy send me your email address.I know that in this forum a lot of posts are doubtful. I read the one Mario posted about the first company outside Motorola trained in Six Sigma. The company Carsem is here in Malaysia, and that is a true fact. I also liked the fact he included the names of the people as facts or data, so I will do the same here.Some of the people attending the first SME Symposium in Motorola, Seoul, Korea in May 1991, were:Glenn Kirk, Bryan Rigg, Adi Bhote, Vincent Tang, Todd Yang, J.J. Lin, Kevin Chiao, K.H. Tan, Baharom, C.C. Shue, Sahidin Kardi, S.J. Lim, Ronnie Manubay, Al Calicdan, Eduardo Bustamante, S.S. Kang, J.H. Suh, A.S. Suk, J.H. Choi, N.K. Seong, T.H. Jung, Y.D. Kang, K.W. You, Mikel Harry, Jim Robertson and Eric Maass.The credit for Six Sigma should go to Mario and not to Harry. Mikel Harry just wrote articles and took all the credit of other people’s work, only because he worked high up in the company and had the power to claim everything for himself. Mario is the guru who taught us his approach to Six Sigma, his methodology, his vision to the SME implementation and he wrote a book just to teach us.On April 26, 2003, another person made similar allegations to SMEs being the first Black Belts, the post reference is: RE: Black Belt History by MMBB:https://www.isixsigma.com/forum/showmessage.asp?messageID=26629I do not work for Mario or his firm. I am just tired of Richard Schroeder’s offensive language and allegations “I trained everybody” and Mikel Harry’s I invented everything related to Six Sigma. When we all know that both were so high up in their companies, probably all day long in meetings, while my colleagues and myself were doing the true black belt work.

    0
    #147805

    Theo
    Member

    A very informative post !
    I’d love a copy of the SME Symposium Proceedings
    [email protected]
    Thank you

    0
    #147806

    Theo
    Member

    It is interesting that nowhere on Mario’s ASC site, nor in his papers, does he make any mention of 1.5 or 3.4.  I assume this is Bill Smith and Harry’s fabrication that Mario sees as false ?
    Mario does however fall into the trap of talking about “yields of  99.9999998%” – (30 bit precision ! ) – I’d like to see how he measures that in any meaningful way !

    0
    #147812

    Theo
    Member

    Well, it seems my post a week or so back was an accurate guess :
    “Correction,
    Well done. Some great investigation and an excellent unveiling of Harry as a fraudster.  Do you know what the field was for his first degree ?  A Bachelor of Arts perhaps ?  “
    A BA and a PhD in psychology !!!  No wonder there’s so much pseudo-statistical nonsense in six sigma !  No wonder Harry knows so little about processes !

    0
    #147814

    Jerome Finnigan
    Participant

    ex SME
    If  your  claims are  true,you  should start writing  a  book with  the  title:The  History  of  Six  Sigma.Just  don’t  wait?thanks  for  the  enlightenment

    0
    #147817

    Peter S
    Participant

    Dorian Shainin used a five step process as well ..
    Define – Metrology – Analysis of variation – Improvement – Control.
    Take Shainin Methods and combine it with Cp and Cpk and what do you get … 6 sigma!
    Update the Shainin techniques with  conventional statistics, introduce an imaginary shift and what do you get – 6 sigma G.E. style
    Sell it back to Motorola and what do you get – disaster!!!!!

    0
    #147819

    Jerome Finnigan
    Participant

    What  happened to  Motorola?I  guess big “Envy”??

    0
    #147834

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Dear Ex-SME,
    In the earlier post (assuming you are the same person), you offered to send a copy of the SME Symposium Proceedings:
    “I kept a few copies of the SME Symposium Proceedings. If anybody wants a copy send me your email address.”
    I would like to take you up on your offer, if it is still open. My email address is [email protected]
    Part of the reason for my interest might be alluded to in your later paragraph:  

    “Some of the people attending the first SME Symposium in Motorola, Seoul, Korea in May 1991, were:

    Glenn Kirk, Bryan Rigg, Adi Bhote, Vincent Tang, Todd Yang, J.J. Lin, Kevin Chiao, K.H. Tan, Baharom, C.C. Shue, Sahidin Kardi, S.J. Lim, Ronnie Manubay, Al Calicdan, Eduardo Bustamante, S.S. Kang, J.H. Suh, A.S. Suk, J.H. Choi, N.K. Seong, T.H. Jung, Y.D. Kang, K.W. You, Mikel Harry, Jim Robertson and Eric Maass.”(please note the last name that you listed – yes, I attended, and presented right after Mikel Harry. As I recall, his presentation was mostly about how – if you are using an Excel spreadsheet – you should use X-bar S charts rather than X-bar R charts.  I considered the proposal to be obvious, but I was impressed by his delivery.).
    Best regards,Eric MaassMotorola (Yes, perhaps the only one there at the initial Symposium who is still with Motorola)

    0
    #147858

    gb
    Participant

    Eric,
    I’d be most interested in your recollections of the early history of Six Sigma.  For example, what were the specific contributions of Smith, Harry, Reigle, Mario; did the 1.5 originate with a confusion of Shainin limits and control limits ? ; etc

    0
    #147859

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Hi, GB –
    At the request of another company, I put together a summary of the history of Six Sigma at Motorola in a PowerPoint file – if you send me your email address, I can forward you a copy.
    It answers your questions with respect to the contributions of Bill Smith and Mikel Harry. I mentioned Mario Perez-Wilson, but didn’t go into much detail – he provided a lot of key input and direction for the large plant in Phoenix, Arizona at 52nd Street and McDowell, had a rigorous and complete method for implementing Statistical Process Control, and – as pointed out by another post in this chain – his steps were strikingly similar to the DMAIC steps later espoused by others. However, I don’t think Mario’s influence spread much beyond the plant at 52nd Street and McDowell, other than perhaps influencing the naming of the DMAIC process. However, at that time we had an alternative to DMAIC called “The Six Steps to Six Sigma”.
    I cannot prove where the 1.5 sigma shift came from, but it seemed to be an effort to compensate for the very high Beta risk (Consumer’s Risk) associated with the control charts used in manufacturing at the time, which had as high as 60% Beta Risk for a 1.5 sigma shift.
    Best regards,Eric MaassMaster Black Belt and Director, Six Sigma Product Development MethodsMotorola

    0
    #147863

    Martínez
    Participant

    Exactly what do you mean by “60% beta risk for a 1.5 shift ” ?
    How do you measure a “60% beta risk” for a control chart ?
    I assume that you are suggesting that your processes were out of control ?
     
    “I cannot prove where the 1.5 sigma shift came from, but it seemed to be an effort to compensate for the very high Beta risk (Consumer’s Risk) associated with the control charts used in manufacturing at the time, which had as high as 60% Beta Risk for a 1.5 sigma shift.”

    0
    #147864

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    MBB,
    No, I am not saying that the processes were out of control.  If you look up the Beta Risk in an appropriate reference on SPC, you will find that a chart like this:

    (I hope that shows – otherwise, you can find the chart at http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/System/3737/statspctimeseries27.html )
    As you can tell from this chart, the X-bar chart – per Shewhart Rules – for a subgroup size, n, of 5 (typical for the manufacturing at Motorola and other companies at the time) has a 60% Beta Risk (Consumer’s Risk) for missing a mean shift of 1.5 standard deviations.
    I hope that you can now re-read my statement with a clearer understanding:
    “I cannot prove where the 1.5 sigma shift came from, but it seemed to be an effort to compensate for the very high Beta risk (Consumer’s Risk) associated with the control charts used in manufacturing at the time, which had as high as 60% Beta Risk for a 1.5 sigma shift.”
    Best regards,Eric MaassMaster Black Belt

    0
    #147866

    Martínez
    Participant

    The charts to which you are referring are known as “Power Function Curves”.  They are still the same today as they were “at that time” as you suggest.  They indicate the probability of detecting various shifts in the mean for various subgroup sizes and for various combinations of control chart detection rules. 
    For Detection Rule 1, subgroup 5, the probability of detecting a shift is:

    23% for 1.0 sigma
    64% for 1.5 sigma
    93% for 2.0 sigma
    Do you agree that there is nothing “special” about the 1.5 level ?
    Do you agree that there is no need to “compensate” for 1.5 ?
    I would not suggest using your chart as it is quite inaccurately drawn.
    I also suggest using clear terminology and statements.  “Consumer’s risk” is quite misleading.  There is no risk to consumers.  These plots are not required in the application of control charts.
     
     

    0
    #147867

    Waste
    Member

    The terms “consumer’s risk” and “producer’s risk” are very clearly defined in acceptance sampling, see the original paper from Dodge and Romer (1929) in The Bell System Technical Journal, and Deming (1950), p. 262, Chapter 8, first section “The producer’s and consumer’s risks”. If you want to be exact, you will have to talk about consumer’s A-risk and producer’s B-risk in the context of this discussion. (Dodge, Romer and Shewart used consumer’s A/B risk, and producer’s A/B risk). Ever since the first publications there has been an implicit assumption that talking about consumer’s and producer’s risks imply consumer’s A and producer’s B risk. The OCC plots were added later (the first textbook that I am aware of is from one of Shewarts’ students from 1949) because the control charts and acceptance sampling schemes were developed independently of each other. However, as Eric and others point out correctly, they give you critical information about the risks that you take when developing and using these charts above and beyond what Shewart wrote in his original work. Also, nowadays, control charts are not just confined to the charts introduced by Shewart (see Ryan’s work on current developments in control charts).

    0
    #147868

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Actually, MBB – I have tried to be polite and respectful to you.
    Frankly, your responses seem to indicate a high level of arrogance – and not consistent with your level of knowledge.
    I see no reason to respond to you further.
    Otherwise, have a happy holiday season.

    0
    #147869

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Waste,
    Thanks for a well-thought out reply.  It shows that you are knowledgeable about this subject. I wonder why you chose the name, “Waste” … I suspect that you are quite valuable to your organization.
    Have a wonderful weekend, and Happy Holidays!
    Best regards,Eric

    0
    #147870

    Martínez
    Participant

    I find it  fascinating to watch the reaction of con men like Eric Maass, when their lies are revealed – they run for cover !! 
    Con men like Eric never dare engage in discussion with intelligent people.  They prey on the gullible.
     

    0
    #147871

    Martínez
    Participant

    Waste,
    The “consumer’s risk” is the probability of accepting a bad lot.
    The “producer’s risk” is the probability  of  rejecting  a good lot.
    Shewhart charts are not probability charts and these terms do not apply to them.

    0
    #147872

    ex SME
    Participant

    It is interest to read your comments about Mario Perez-Wilson only influencing 52nd Street but when I was in Motorola, Mario Perez-Wilson introduced the MPCpS Methodology to achieve and sustain Six Sigma
    in my facility and in all the facilities listed below. I know this because I had the responsibility of implementing Six Sigma in many facilities and at the time everyone was just implementing control charts, and Mario came with his approach of Five Stages.India – Motorola (P) Ltd. – Bangalore
    Mexico – Motorola de Mexico, S.A. – Guadalajara
    Malaysia – Motorola Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. – Kuala Lumpur
    Motorola Semiconductor Sdn. Bhd. – Fab, Seremban
    Motorola Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. – Penang
    Motorola Electronics Sdn. Bhd. – Seremban
    Korea – Motorola Korea, Ltd. – Seoul
    Philippines – Motorola Asia, Ltd. – Manila
    Taiwan – Motorola Electronics Taiwan, Ltd. – Chung Li
    Hong Kong – Motorola Semiconductor HK, Ltd. – Hong Kong
    China – Motorola (China) Electronics, Ltd. – Tianjin
    Singapore – Motorola Electronics Pte. Ltd. – Ang Mo Kio
    Motorola Electronics (PCB) Pte. Ltd. – Tuas
    Motorola Electronics (PCB) Pte. Ltd. – Pioneer
    Puerto Rico – Motorola Telcarro de Puerto Rico, Inc. – Puerto Rico
    Florida – Motorola (Paging Product Group) – Boynton Beach
    Austin – Motorola (Microcontroller Technology) – Ed Bluestein
    Motorola (Microprocessor Product Group) – Oak Hill
    Dallas – Motorola (Adv. Messaging Group). – Fort Worth
    Phoenix – Motorola Semiconductor Prod. Sector – 52 nd StreetI know that in our facility in Malaysia in 1987 we had nothing going on with respect to Six Sigma until Mario introduced it and trained Bill Meder (VP of all the sites in Asia) and his staff and then trained all of these facilities. I was the SME (Statistics Methods Engineering – Six Sigma Site Coordinator) and had to communicate and share our characterization studies and all Six Sigma project with the other SMEs of all of these sites.Frankly I remember very well, that in all the years I worked there, neither Mikel Harry, Bill Smith nor Eric Maass EVER comming to our plants to teach anything or review anything related to Six Sigma.The MPCpS five stage methodology was the Six Sigma approach that Motorola used from its origins and in 1991 alone Motorola clamied in its Annual Report that is saved 700 million and from 1987 to 1991, Motorola claimed it saved 2.2 billion. The DMAIC, Black Belts did not started in Motorola until 1994, so it was never part of the billions in saving clamied by Motorola. Mario Perez-Wilson is the one that put together the methods that eventually became Six Sigma. Every consultant at the time was only teaching how to put control charts in production.So, I read all of this comments from ex-Motorolas that they never did anything, claiming they were part of Six Sigma.The origins of Six Sigma lies in the methodology that Mr. Perez-Wilson put together.

    0
    #147873

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Excuse me, little boy.
    I am not the one hiding behind the pseudonym, MBB.
    If you had any decency, you would reread the conversation. I responded to a question from someone else.You responded to my answer with more questions, with a slight overtone of hostility combined with arrogance.
    I chose to ignore your hostility, and responded to one of your questions, including finding a scanned graph of Beta Risk for a Control  Chart.You attacked every sentence I gave, with arrogance and hostility. You even insulted the scanned graph that I had found. How small-minded can you be?I don’t know you, but I would guess that you drive a lot of people away from you with your arrogant attitude and your pettiness.
    I don’t want to know you. But, I hope one day you will look in the mirror, and decide to become a more decent person.Then, you will perhaps be worthy of  respect.

    0
    #147874

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Ex-SME,
    I am sorry that you took my remark that way. I was not thinking in terms of off-shore facilities, which I am sure that Mario Perez-Wilson worked with and helped.
    I was referring to the other U.S. based plants – both other US-based plants, such as the one in Mesa, Arizona, and GEG in Scottsdale, as well as the facilities in the Chicago area.
    I stated that it is possible that Mario Perez-Wilson’s excellent SPC process was the key influence on the similarly-named DMAIC process.
    However, I feel it was inappropriate for you to make the comment regarding my help with the manufacturing plants.  I did not work with some of the sites you listed – most of them were associated with the 52nd Street plant involved in Discretes. I did teach some classes in sites in Guadalajara, METL / Taiwan, and Manila, but you may not have been aware of my efforts there. However, whereas Mario Perez-Wilson’s full time job involved such training and coaching, my full time job was as Device Engineering Manager of a wafer fabrication area.
    You do not know what I was involved in, and I would guess that you are more interested in preserving the name of Mario Perez-Wilson than learning about others who also contributed.However, you should not jump to assumptions that others did not contribute. They, and I, did.
    I hope you had a Happy Thanksgiving, and have a great weekend.
    Best regards,Eric Maass

    0
    #147875

    Martínez
    Participant

    The con man Eric returns to throw some mud and try some name calling – the usual reactions of a man with his back to the wall.
    Interesting how he still avoids answering the questions that reveal his lies.
    Eric, you will find that your lies, deception and fraud are no way to win respect. 

    0
    #147876

    Waste
    Member

    MBB,
    You state: “Shewhart charts are not probability charts and these terms do not apply to them”.
    You are correct if you assume that “Shewart” charts “express the control limits on xbar and R charts as multiple of the standard deviation of the statistics plotted on the charts. If the multiple chosen is k, then the limits are referred to as k-sigma limits, the usual choice being k = 3. (…) it is also possible to define the control limits by specifying the type I error level for the test. Such control limits are called probability limits, and are used extensively in the United Kingdom and some parts of Western Europe” (Montgomery 1997, p. 199).
    You will have to discuss the emergence of probability instead of k-limits with the Ministry of Supply Advisory Service on Statistical Methods and Quality Control, which was founded in the summer of 1942 in Britain. In particular, K.A. Brownlee from the Directorate of Ordnance Factories (Explosives) will be your main contact in addressing your concerns regarding the substitution of k-limits with probability limits. Unfortunately, he died in 1990.
    You may also want to let Montgomery know that Eric’s OCC chart “is quite inaccurately drawn”. Montgomery will definitely make every effort to avoid this crucial mistake on page 207 of the 3rd edition of his Statistical Quality Control in the future! I heard he is also very open to suggestions by MBBs like yourself to change his position on the relationship between control charts and probability theory. He and Wheeler have gone at this issue for the past 20 years, and I am sure that your superior knowledge and expertise in this area will sway the debate into Wheeler’s direction :-).

    0
    #147877

    OW
    Participant

    …for some strange reason the prose of MBB seems to bear more than a passing resemblance to the prose of BMT, the scream name who went after Andy U awhile back….are they one and the same?
    What’s say we not do this again?
    Old and Weary

    0
    #147878

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Thanks, Old and Weary — I agree wholeheartedly!Let’s not do this again!
    I hope you have a wonderful and relaxing weekend to soothe your weariness  (and perhaps a bit of excitement along the way to make you feel young and energetic)
    Best regards,Eric

    0
    #147879

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    Wow, Waste! You continue to amaze me! You have an impressive grasp of control charting – and some of the associated controversies. I would guess that you have similar strengths in other fields as well.Take care, and best wishes for a Happy Holiday season to you and to those you hold dear!

    0
    #147880

    Waste
    Member

    Eric,
    Thanks! … and the respect is mutual. A belated Happy Thanksgiving!

    0
    #147882

    Waste
    Member

    One last note on the reasons why British statisticians developed probability rather than k-limits:
    Shewhart’s most important contribution to both statistics and industry was the development of the statistical control of quality. This idea incorporated the use of independent identically distributed random variables. The general principle behind this idea is that when a process is in a state of control and following any particular distribution with certain parameters, the purpose is to determine when the process departs from this control state so corrective action may be taken. Therefore, schem es must be developed that give a signal as to when the process has departed.
    The Shewhart procedure, gave a signal when the process moved from the target mean m. Shewhart developed “action lines” at m ± k< where s is the standard deviation and k is a constant Shewhart found to be about 3. If the process departed from the target mean, a signal was given if the sample mean fell outside the action lines. This procedure was reliable enough to only have a probability of 1/500 of getting a Type I error. Shewhart displayed this idea of statistical control through the use of the control chart or the run-chart, which he proposed to his super iors on May 16, 1924.
    One problem however in Shewhart’s procedure was that it did not find the magnitude of change in the process, and it was unable to quickly find large changes within small samples. Knowing the magnitude of change would allow one to adjust the proced ure by the magnitude found. These problems were addressed by statisticians such as Dudding, Jennett, and Grant in the 1940’s and 50’s.
    Dudding and Jennett’s paper was published in 1942 by the Royal Statistical Society (they started working on the issue in 1936 as a separate section of the Statistical Society) and their work was extended by Page in 1955/1957/1962 to become the foundations are what are now known as the “British control charts”. Grant published his textbook in 1949.
    MBB, the ball is in your court!

    0
    #147886

    Martínez
    Participant

    Waste,
    You might appreciate this comparison of the Shewhart / Deming / Wheeler approach vs Montgomery’s probability approach:
    http://www.asq.org/pub/jqt/past/vol32_issue4/qtec-341.pdf
    He favours Shewhart.

    0
    #147887

    Martínez
    Participant

    You are clearly missing the point. Shewhart’s limits do not have probabilities associated with them as you suggest :
    “If the process departed from the target mean, a signal was given if the sample mean fell outside the action lines. This procedure was reliable enough to only have a probability of 1/500 of getting a Type I error.”

    0
    #147888

    Martínez
    Participant

    Old and Weary,
    Andy U seems to know what he’s talking about and he also sees through much of the six sigma garbage.  Andy sees Harry as a charlatan.  There are a growing number of people like me who are sick and tired of the absolute crap being put forward by six sigma consultants, in order to prop up their empires.

    0
    #147889

    Waste
    Member

    MBB,
    I think, it is time for you to dig into the literature since 1923 and read that stuff. I have given you some of the main lines of literature. Enjoy the reading.

    0
    #147890

    Waste
    Member

    I think that you will find that Wheeler’s many excellent books and articles are published well after 1923.  Perhaps you haven’t heard of him ?  You would benefit from some reading his work.

    0
    #147891

    Jerome Finnigan
    Participant

    Agree  fully  with  you

    0
    #147899

    Waste
    Member

    MBB,
    YOU GOT FOOLED again and have to blast out your ignorance on the internet, quel embarrasement -:))))
    Wheeler makes the case for Shewart’s original work, i.e. the k-limits which do not require normality. Wheeler adds to Shewart’s work in that he extends the types of distributions that are robust under violations of the normality assumption. Other than that he more or less rewrites Shewart’s 1931 book for modern readers. Please read at least these two books when lecturing us about your dogmatic views on control charts.
    What Wheeler fails to mention is that if you interpret the limits as probability limits as the British do, the normality assumption becomes important (see Tiplett’s article in Biometrika, 1962, see also Montgomery’s work on control charts). This is where the eternal dispute over the normality assumption comes from which cannot be resolved because there are two underlying models and purposes of the control chart (the first two pages of Tiplett’s articles make that very clear).
    So, do us all a favor, and spare us the public displays of your embarrasments and faux-pas. Currently, you’re not even at the intellectual equivalent of a girls amateur softball league. But then you are “gooey”, “Bash Me Too”, “Spoon” or “Reigle” and live somewhere in what Wallerstein once called the cultural and intellectual periphery … :-))))

    0
    #147903

    Martínez
    Participant

    Listen, Eric or Reigle, or whatever half witted fool you are, if you looked beyond Montgomery and actually read Wheeler, you would discover how he shows in great theoretical detail, how your probability approach is nonsense.
    Perhaps you would like to match your qualifications against those of Wheeler ?  Perhaps you are just another one of Harry’s pathetic crowd with no engineering backgriound at all, with qualifications in psychology ?

    0
    #147906

    Eric Maass
    Participant

    MBB,
    Unlike you, I actually give my name and am willing to share my background.I have my Master’s degree in Chemical and Biomedical Engineering. I have completed the coursework and am editting my dissertation to complete my doctorate in Industrial Engineering – an interesting challenge while working full-time. 
    I have no issue with Wheeler.  I simply responded to a question from someone other than you when he asked me if I had heard anything about where the 1.5 sigma shift idea had come from, and shared what I recalled hearing at that time.   You seem to have a problem with that – I’m guessing that you get emotional everytime you hear about the 1.5 sigma shift. You also seem to get emotional everytime you hear the name Mikel Harry.I can understand that. Both the 1.5 sigma shift and Mikel Harry are controversial.
    However, I do not visit this website to respond to your emotions. I come here to see if I can answer some questions and perhaps help someone occasionally. 
    Best regards,Eric MaassMaster Black Belt, Motorola

    0
    #147908

    Ashman
    Member

    You posts are as much a waste of time as your name suggests. Why don’t you go buy a bottle of cheap wiskey and get realy wasted and spare us your garbage ?

    0
Viewing 100 posts - 101 through 200 (of 240 total)

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