iSixSigma

Problem with something, need help

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Problem with something, need help

Viewing 45 posts - 1 through 45 (of 45 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49723

    Sloan
    Participant

    I have a problem with something. Please send me detailed instructions on how to fix it. I’m too lazy and or sloppy to do any research whatsoever (other than to stumble on this forum). In fact, I don’t even have time to tell you what my problem is or what kind of process I have. Please guess. I’d rather have someone else do all the work for me and send me the answer so I don’t have to think.
    If you ask for more clarification, I will gladly do my best to provide confusing, vague, unhelpful responses and then blame you all for not helping me.
    Please send responses to my email address which I have neglected to provide.
    Thank you.

    0
    #170235

    Stevo
    Member

    Outlier,
    It doesn’t matter what the problem is.  Just use the “7 tools”.  You’ll be fine.
    Stevo

    0
    #170236

    Brandon
    Participant

    Outlier there you go again posing as….well, everyone!

    0
    #170237

    Deanb
    Participant

    Stevo,Don’t you mean the “7-right tools”.

    0
    #170239

    clb1
    Participant

    Stevo’s almost right – 42 is, in fact, the answer to everything.  If you only want a partial answer you should, as Stevo suggested, use one of its factors. 7 would be a good place to start but 42 is really what you should use.

    0
    #170240

    Deanb
    Participant

    The key is to “count” the tools first. Without quantitative data any thinking about tools is NVA.

    0
    #170242

    Stevo
    Member

    Ok, here’s what you:
     
    Create a phantom project, say the real problem is out of scope and will be addressed in “Phase II”.  By that time, some $7 an hour employee would have fixed it or you are long gone.  Either way……
     
    More top shelf stuff from:
     
    Stevo

    0
    #170243

    Deanb
    Participant

    It is pointless to waste time discovering problems. All that does is force you to admit you have a problem, which makes you look bad.

    0
    #170245

    Sloan
    Participant

    WHY WON’T YOU PEOPLE HELP ME?!

    0
    #170246

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stevo,
    They will probably one of those Georges to help with the 7 Basic Tools fits all application.
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #170248

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Outlier,
    We did we just neglected to include the answer in our posts.

    0
    #170250

    Deanb
    Participant

    It isn’t us. You must be lacking the structure and rigor to see our wisdom. Never mind your problems. Just focus on pointing out everyone else’s problems, just highlight how their problems represent personal character weakness on their part. Feel free to refer them to us if you need them to fail even more.

    0
    #170252

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    That sounded like you were a little sensitive.

    0
    #170253

    Vallee
    Participant

    I have infinite wisdom. Please contact me at 111.111.222.333 and I will tell you everything I have done. After all I only want to help myself.. I mean you…that’s it. Please don’t lump me with the other guys.

    0
    #170254

    Deanb
    Participant

    Glad my absurdities are appreciated.

    0
    #170255

    Deanb
    Participant

    HF. You are not following protocol. You are supposed to tell everyone else they don’t know jack, then post your rate sheet. Come on, do it right.

    0
    #170256

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    Excellent status.Just continue like that

    0
    #170257

    Marlon Brando
    Participant

    Just because we are like you :Lazy and crazy

    0
    #170261

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Appreciated? Noticed.

    0
    #170262

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Considering the length of time this Forum has been in place if that was infact the protocol I would think we would have seen a “rate sheet” posted at some point. I don’t recall ever seeing one posted. Do you know where I could find that?

    0
    #170266

    Sloan
    Participant

    So after I get all of this data that I have collected, do I just put it in Minitab? Which button do I push to get the answer? What does “p-value” mean? I have a bunch of survey data that I want to analyze. The answers are all either “yes” or “no.” My coach said I need to determine if my data is normal and if it is not I need to transform it. Would you please explain to me how I transform this data to normal so I can use the X-Bar/R chart?
    Still confused.

    0
    #170267

    Deanb
    Participant

    Trying to confuse us with the facts is not in keeping with the spirit of this site.

    0
    #170271

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Another absurdity or may I quote you on that? 
    You speak for this site how?

    0
    #170284

    Swaggerty
    Participant

    And maybe , Mike u got to have your eyes checked, and check the posts before u begin mouthing off again

    0
    #170286

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    Just like the last guy that made the ridiculous statement that you made, you were called to produce data to back it up. I will even create an opportunity for you to prove it if you choose. I don’t see much coming from your side to back up your statement.
    Maybe instead of worrying about my eye sight you need to understand the subject you are offering advice about.

    0
    #170290

    Swaggerty
    Participant

    Mike
    The comment that you are referring to..to refresh your memory, which also seems in need of attention before you start questioning my subject knowledge, is
    “DisagreeSeven tools are for the start up only,later you will need more advanced tools”, by Fake MBB.
    My reply was
    ““MAY NEED…NOT WILL NEED”…most things can be dug into using the 7 Q C tools. By & large, most issues have low lying fruits which can be fixed with a bit of common sense. Six Sigma heps u bring a structured approach to it”
    The key words were “May Need”. And yes, I have done a project on improving delivery times for a small firm, and we were able to fix it using the basic tools and production planning. What sort of data do you require to substantiate this?
    And maybe you ought to start thinking twice b4 shooting your mouth off…
    Incidentally, maybe u could also clarify as to what is so ridiculous about the answer i gave..
    Take your time..I’m sure the forum is watching this conversation with active interest
    George

    0
    #170292

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    Mt point exactly. You have questioned the need for anything beyond the 7 basic tools. Fake MBB made the comment that SS will be needed and you questioned that saying it may be needed. The 7 basic tools are inadequate as a stand alone set of tools if for no other reason than they do not evaluate the measurement system (yes control charts can be used. That is a recent contibution.).
    The other comment that is irritating and quite possibly arrogant is that most issues can be fixed with common sense. So we can assume that since you believe most issues can be fixed with common sense that any operation/process that still has issues has one of two things going on 1. the people there have no common sense 2. they have common sense and just don’t care about fixing their problems. Which one was it?
    I am not sure what part of my answer you don’t understand. You don’t seem to understand the difference between a collection of tools and a methodology. You have done “a” project. You are going to show up on a site that sees over a half million visitors a month and based on your project (singular) you are going to make statements like this. So you are one of those “wood floats so everything that floats is wood” thinkers.
    I am sure that your single project has provided you with so much insight that you are legitimate in this. Lets do this: a sample size of 1. The confidence interval?
    George I am not sure why you think either you or I are so important that we command the attention and/or interest of the entire forum. Issues like this come and go on this Forum on a daily basis. So you comment also seems a little self absorbed.
    Thank you for your concern over my time.
     

    0
    #170293

    Swaggerty
    Participant

    Let me put this in points so that it seems simpler:1)Fake MBB said that Advanced tools will be required.. I Said ‘May’. I do no think that means ‘I questioned the need for anything beyond the 7 basic tools.’2)After my comment about common sense, there was also something about Six Sigma bringing a structured approach…I dont think you latched on to that. Incidentally, based on your comments I assume that you take whatever is mentioned in this Forum @ face value3)’I have done a project’ does not mean I have only worked on a single project. Backs up the statement that i had about you taking things at face value earlier4) As far as your last comment is concerned, I agree with you.
    As much as I appreciate your knowledge, and I will readily admit that you have more experience than me, I too take my postings seriously, and do not make goof-ups ( @ least consciously)
    Thanks for your time too, Mike
    George

    0
    #170294

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    Just as a side note. If I were choose to get thrown into the simplification of problem solving by counting tools and was told that I could only teach one tool to an organization to resolve their issues it would be MSA. Engineers/scientists are problem solvers by nature. If you give them good/better data their ability to identify root cause is inherently better as a function of the quality of the data not as a function of their ability.
    Rob Tripp made a comment the other day “the process you have is perfectly designed to give you the results you are getting.” The most effective way to change someones perception of their process is to make them acutely aware of the variation induced into their process, as they know it, by the measurement system. That awareness is key to a person understanding “the process they have” which enables a person to change a process to “something it should be.” It not only enables people to recognize different solutions, it is the first step in change management. The recognition that what they believe they know about a process based on the data they have versus the data as it actually is. It takes that recognition at an individual level to set aside their personal resistance to change.
    Since I haven’t been forced to make that decision I will continue to stay with a methodology as opposed to a collection of tools for even simple projects such as Just Do It projects because even those projects need structure, rigor and discipline to achieve sustainable results.
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #170296

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    1. May = “you might need them” as well as “you might not need them.” The 7 basic tools are inadequate as problem solving strategy for a company. There are skills necessary that are not included in the 7 basic tools so the word may doesn’t work. It also does not mean that Six Sigma is the only answer. A person can can understand tools without understanding Six Sigma but the 7 basic tools won’t do it.
    2. We take people at face value because what the write is what we know about them generally. I know Darth, Stan, Stevo, BTDT, Shooter, etc. and don’t make those assumptions. The common sense choice I provided still hold true.
    3. See #2
    4. I take mine seriously as well. I guess that makes us both serious guys.
    You are welcome.

    0
    #170297

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    I don’t seem to be getting complete thoughts out today.
    I have never made an issue out of my experience versus yours in this thread since I don’t know what experience you have beyond the comment about “a” project.
    I owned a ski shop in Pocatello, Idaho at one point and have skiied with people with “20 years experience” that still belonged on the bunny slope. I have also skiied with people what had less than 1 season and were qualified to ski black diamond runs. The quality of the experience is more important.
    Just my opinion

    0
    #170311

    Deanb
    Participant

    Mike,I am sure you have good reasons for having a low regard for the 7 Tools for the high level of problem solving you are doing, and I respect that. Experiencing successes and failures over and over again tends to make us all overly sensitive to something.However, to posit that the 7Ts can NEVER be useful or sufficient is logically an extreme claim which, according to the rules of logic, shifts the burden of proof to you in this argument.The 7Ts have frequently been useful and sufficient in the vast world of CI, and the fact that these have been around so long and supported by so many accomplished professionals speaks volumes to their legitimate role in the right circumstances.In very basic CI environments any form of awareness can often be sufficient for instantly solving a problem. I have seen simple conversations accomplish this, with no data or MSA needed. I have seen cases where even the 7Ts were overkill for the situation. Unethical policies, bullying, abusive treatment of employees, or failure to communicate are prime examples of this. Any tool that contributes to problem awareness is a legitimate tool and should not be discarded just because the tool has limitations. By definition, some could argue that all tools, and even all methodologies have natural limitations.You can say the 7Ts are not useful in your work, or that you personally find them inadequate, and you would be on fair ground. But to make sweeping statements that they are completely useless and inadequate in all situations (and that anyone that has used them are morons) takes your potentially valid argument into invalid territory, IMHO.

    0
    #170313

    Fake MBB
    Participant

    7Ts are only basic tools (less than 10% of the SS Toolkit).

    0
    #170321

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Deanb,
     
    As much as this is an exercise in futility since you are firmly ensconced in your position I will run through the logic of why teaching the 7 basic tools as a stand alone problem solving methodology is a waste of time for an organization. You are correct in that what we train people does include all 7 tools but we also do use them independently i.e. “if you think this is a really simple problem just skip everything else and just use this tool.”
     
    We have found that a problem statement is extremely useful so that everybody understands what we are working on. Not in the 7 basic tools. We always agree on a Primary metric so that we can establish what the effect of the problem solving activity has accomplished (that would be the Y or the effect that the Process Owner is looking for). We also have secondary metrics so that we know we are not moving the primary metric at the expense of another metric i.e. trading off quality for throughput. We also train basic Lean and Change Management tools in Define and Measure. I can see where someone would want to skip those because we know that under the 7 basic tools and simple problems there are never any issues with Lean problems or Change Management. I am not sure about you but I know when I speak to people in an organization that has used the 7 basic tools I never find anyone who has had to solve the same problem twice (that was sarcasm for those taking things at face value). We have also found tools such as capability analysis (I am not a fan), FMEA, MSA and a cause and effect matrix are extremely useful. I don’t see any reason to go back over MSA. Capability studies don’t turn up solutions but they do seem get some to understand the degree to which a problem exists. FMEA is a great tool for making sure you have addressed all the issues i.e. so that people don’t over look potential causes so we don’t have to solve anything twice. I is also a great tool for synthesizing all the initial information a person needs to assemble to solve a problem and set a priority in dealing with the x’s using the rpn. It is also a very nice contingency planning tool. I have forgotten the basic stats we teach. That is probably not a big deal. I am sure that control charts are so intuitive that there would be any need to understand basic stats to use that tool.
     
    The 7 basic tools completely pass over anything we teach in Analyze and Improve. Since basic problem solving never has to deal with the comparison of anything such as two or more suppliers, two or more methodologies, two or more shifts, etc I can see where if it is a simple problem we would be able to skip understanding a distribution, a variance or a mean so we definitely don’t need any form of hypothesis testing (sarcasm again for those reading at face value). There is need for any other form of charting so we can skip the tools such as dot plots, box plots and Multi-vari studies particularly since they are so technical oriented. Maybe someday someone will invent a software that will do all of this so that we don’t have to restrict people to 7 basic tools and they can print out all these different types of charts as easily as they do the Pareto charts, histograms, scatter plots and run charts used as a part of the 7 basic tools. Since the use of the 7 basic tools assumes the intuitive understanding of stats so that people can use control charts that same intuitive understanding works for the hypothesis testing.
     
    Speaking of scatter plots maybe when we get that software we can teach them something like Correlation or Regression so that instead of guessing at the strength of a relationship they can actually make a decision based on a statistical test. I can see where there is such a huge leap from a scatter plot to correlation and regression that we don’t want to confuse anyone. Since problems are simple I can see were there is no use for a r square value so that you can tell what portion of the problem you are dealing with? Maybe that same intuitive stats understanding from the control charts would work here as well.
     
    DOE I will concede. How often do we legitimately need it? Not that often. I may be missing something here though. What tool was it that used in the 7 basic tools that allows you to understand interactions? Of course these are simple problems so there won’t be any interactions.
     
    Control. We do spend quite a bit of time on control charts. Since we have chosen to only use the 7 basic tools we can skip those higher level tools such as control plans and Poke Yoke. Very complex. Why would we need those except on technical problems.
     
    We can go into the logic of making sure we understand financial results so that when leadership teams understand the financial impact of what you are doing they understand your contribution to the organization and you gain credibility. Who needs that. There certainly has never been a post that discussed management support.
     
    We have been spoon fed this KISS (keep it simple stupid) attitude all our lives and then we wonder why our processes (not just the technical ones) are so completely screwed up. We make excuses for not taking the time to do it right (so we only have to do it once?) and then we write it off to the fact that it wasn’t a complicated problem. I tend to subscribe to “for every simple solution there is an unsolved problem.”
     
    Lets just think about it – logically. Since I consult in Six Sigma would it make any sense for me to ever write a contract with a customer that said I am going to do a Six Sigma deployment with you if I believed that most of this could be solved with 7 basic tools? If my real belief was that it were true I would write a contract that said we will teach the 7 basic tools and then based on assessing your problems we would be glad to discuss teaching you a higher level of tools because you “may” need them. Even if I were to write a contract that said we will teach you the 7 basic tools and then you may need Six Sigma, in todays market most customers would say “don’t we need Lean as well? If the 7 basic tools will solve most problems why are people being sold so much Lean?” There is that tired old crap of Six Sigma isn’t the silver bullet. No shit. Neither is Lean and neither is TOC and neither is the 7 basic tools and neither is SAP and neither is MRP and neither is any other program you can name.
     
    The rigor and discipline of defining a problem, baselineing a problem and institutionalizing a problem do not go away because it is a simple problem. The first assumption is that you can look at something and determine that it is simple. That may or may not be true because it is only based on your current knowledge. We have already seen a ton of people who have created a huge problem for themselves trying to figure out if something is a Lean or Six Sigma project and we are going to enhance their lives by adding something extra for simple problems.
     
    The rigor and discipline of problem solving do not go away because a problem is deemed to be simple. We are better off teaching them that they need steps such as defining a problem, baselineing a problem, analyzing a problem and institutionalizing a solution. Those are steps that never go away and they do not have only Six Sigma as a solution. When you throw a set of tools at them and tell them this will cover it you invite the rework of doing again and the eventual death of the program because of its lack of efficiency and sustainability.
     
    7 basic tools made sense to some degree in its day. With the software packages such as Minitab there is no reason to truncate what we teach people unless we believe that they are not smart enough to deal with it. At this point I have not found that to be true.
     
    Just my opinion.
     
    Stevo – yeah this is a long answer but this discussion is beyond tedious.

    0
    #170322

    Mikel
    Member

    Amen and the same for Shainin Tools – they had their place back
    before we had better automation of more sophisticated tools (ie
    Minitab and Quality Companion).

    0
    #170323

    Deanb
    Participant

    Mike,You seem to be arguing that the 7 Basic Tools should not be used as “a stand alone methodology.” Guess what: I agree.I also agree that modern approaches using Minitab are faster and slicker enablers than the 7Ts which used to be done with pencil and paper. For that matter, any tool is only as good as the management scheme it serves. So that applies to the entire SS tool kit. No tool solves any problem by itself. Back to the original argument. I cannot find in the recent threads anyone who has claimed the 7Ts are to be used as a “stand alone methodology.” Can you find one?You may be making a Strawman Argument with no true opponent.

    0
    #170325

    Fake MBB
    Participant

    Great elaboration

    0
    #170332

    Venerable Bede
    Member

    Mike, George, (ironic, huh?)
    The opportunity to play voyeur to your spat has made for an enriching weekend.  But the fight seems a little bit like Mohammed Ali (Carnell) versus Sylvester Stallone (George).   
    What baffles me is why George got into the ring in the first place and then remained there!  Overpowered in experience, intellect, and rhetorical skill, George’s shallow pretense of Six Sigma knowledge were painfully apparent.  But you keep using those 7 tools, Georgie!
    And the real prize here was when George revealed his true identity as if that gave credence to anything he had written.  The reality is it only undermines anything that has his name attached to it.  Thanks, George, for confirming my suspicions about your books since I have only had time (and inclination) to scan the tables of contents to this point.
    Carnell, after reading your posts I doubt I will ever use a Pareto chart again.  Thanks for setting me straight.
    Bede

    0
    #170334

    Swaggerty
    Participant

    Interesting comment about taking things at face value, since nobody else was able to draw as many conclusions as u did. Maybe others lack your deep perspective.
    Either ways, I believe I made my point some time back..if you still fail to understand it, I wont be surprised. Hence, i also believe that responding to these posts trying to justify the same point repeatedly is a waste of time.
    I’ll leave you the liberty of having the last word (an opportunity I’m sure you will not be able to pass up)
    Thanks and regards,
    George

    0
    #170357

    Eddie Haskell
    Participant

    Yes, George, you do have a point.  And if you wear a hat maybe…MAYbe….nobody will notice.
    EH 

    0
    #170368

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Venerable Bede,
    My apologies. I never meant to completely discourage the use of a Pareto Diagram. It is a useful tool but just like everything else it won’t suffice as the only tool or even 14% of your required tools.
    Haven’t read your book but it must be good you made Wikipedia.
    Regards

    0
    #170369

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stan,
    I was wondering if you were going to log in on this one.
    Regards

    0
    #170371

    Mikel
    Member

    Yes – have not had any good Dorian rants lately. Your conversation
    seemed to be the perfect segway. I had an interesting conversation with his son a few months ago.

    0
    #170396

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Stan,
    Did you have to sign a nondisclosure befor the talk?
    Regards

    0
    #170418

    Sloan
    Participant

    This is SO COOL! My little post sparked a Flame War! My only regret is that I was not aropund for the past few days to watch it unfold in real time!
    Please don’t let the embers get cold. Wasn’t someone about to question someone else’s family intellect?
    On a lighter note, The Tarheels are going to the Final Four again! Go Tarheels!
    (Sorry, my Carolina Blue is showing.)
    Outlier
     

    0
Viewing 45 posts - 1 through 45 (of 45 total)

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