iSixSigma

Reflecting on your training

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Reflecting on your training

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #29420

    George Thompson
    Participant

    Question to everyone?
    Now that you have been trained and certified BB or MBB, and you have a few years under your belt.  If you had to go back to the training table, what is the most important aspect of your BB training you would want emphasized?

    0
    #75361

    Martínez
    Participant

    The soft training at GE on managing change was the most important for me. Their program is called Change Accleration Process and is weaved into black belts/master black belts training for Change Management as well as Facilitation skills. Without these skills the experience as a BB/MBB could be very frustrating. 

    0
    #75363

    Opey
    Participant

    I would want the methodology of DMAIC held up as clearly more critical than any/all of the tools.  I was choked with tools, and as a result I couldn’t grasp the big picture, that Six Sigma was at its core a problem-solving process, with 5 simple (to understand anyway!) steps.  Along this line, I’d say the thought process map, or its equivalent, is what I’d want hammered into me if I had to do it again.
    Opey

    0
    #75381

    George Thompson
    Participant

    As a follow up to my initial question.  I was interested in knowing  how relevent is the study path of Repeatability and Reproducibility to your real world performance improvement activities.
    Does the question of stability and accuracy of your current measurement processes often come into question?  This second question relates to the first question in the prior paragraph.
    I am really curious?

    0
    #75417

    Heebeegeebee BB
    Participant

    Change Management and the “Jedi Mind Trick”.
    -HBGBBB

    0
    #75422

    Annonymous
    Participant

    The thing most lacking in my initial training was any hint of HOW to actually implement the necessary changes within our organization. ( I was trained by consultants “jump starting” an internal corporate program.)  We needed (and didn’t get there – there was a late effort to provide for the lack in a seperate “leadership”class) project management, political/cultural analysis, facilitation skills, and reassurance that “real change is slow and hard”. 
    What we got was fairly superficial treatment of statistical and process-identification tools (not quite equivalent to the one graduate-level course I’d already had in statistics) and assurances that the “breakthrough” magic of the DMAIC process would inevitably lead us, if we were doing it “right” to the root cause (singular!!!) of the problem, whereupon the solution would be “obvious”. 
    To respond to your second query, yes, my organization has very substantial issues with the accuracy and stability of our measurement tools/systems.  But it’s very much a case of the Emperor’s wardrobe being so exquisite as to be imperceptible to the intellectually or culturally-challenged.  Our process owners and project champions (and they are often different people!) don’t want to hear this news.  And a substantial portion of them are in the habit of at least imprisoning, if not actually executing messengers with unwelcome news.
    As the first few classes of Black Belts graduate from the program after 2 years, they’re having substantial difficulty in recruiting new ones.  Wonder why?

    0
    #75469

    RR Kunes
    Member

    Huge !
     
    Many people operate a company on data that is either unreliable or inadequate based on the methods of gathering and analyzing data.

    0
    #75471

    TCJ
    Member

    The most important aspect of training I would like to emphasis is “the goal of incremental improvement”.  Very rarely will you take a process from Z = 1 to Z = 6, but as you analyze the project it should give way to additional projects that eventually gets you close to process entitlement.  Secondly, emphasize the need to be a “change agent/leader”.
     

    0
    #75497

    Anon 2
    Participant

    Anon,
    I was reading your response and wondering if we work for the same organization!
    I received my training a few years into the program, was trained by internal Master Black Belts, and like you, it was lacking.  The statistics in some cases were sluffed over (although we spent an excessive amount of time on Gage R&R and DOE in my particular class).  I still to this day do not feel the training in the statistical tools was adequate.
    That said, I have recently transferred to another division in the corporation, and the projects I have here are primarily transactional in nature, so many of the statistical tools do not apply to what I am doing.  The real need is definitely CHANGE MANAGEMENT and the analysis of the organization and how to deal with the inherant resistance that we face as change leaders.  Like you, our organization’s management does not fully support Six Sigma, so it is extremely frustrating. 
    I would also add that proper training for Champions and process owners in their roles as such would be extremely helpful.  Our Champions and Process Owners (again, most often different people) do not have a functional idea of their roles and responsibilities, and it is extremely frustrating.
    So much for implementing Six Sigma from the “bottom up.”
     

    0
    #75543

    RR Kunes
    Member

    Increased emphasis on the “Soft Skills” required to successfully complete a project. This training should be ancillary to the tool training perhaps an additonal week or additional course work outside the six sigma classroom.

    0
    #75571

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    George,
    I have only had one customer who went back and actually calculated the number of projects which failed the R&R study. They were a sophisticated company and technology was not an issue. The failure rate was 80%.
    If you were to separate attribute in a cata gory by itsself the failure rate would be over 90%.
    It doesn’t sound like the answer you were looking for but the fact is were don’t measure things very well.
    Good Luck.

    0
    #75572

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Just a couple comments on training. Very frequently (and even more frequently these days) people who understand statistical theory believe they are capable of writing training material, so they do. Frequently they do not understand application. Even less understand Change.
    In my opinion it is not reasonable to believe that SS is the vehicle to import Change Management into your organization. There are professionals in OD who do this. Unfortunately the few companies that recognize the OD professionals use them for succession planning once a year and then treat them as an “extra pair of hands” in the HR department the rest of the year. The ability to change is the ability to survive in todays business world. This position should report to a “C” Level type. Take a look at GE. CAP (Change Accelleration Process) was there before we showed up to deliver SS. The ability to Change is a basic survival skill every corporation should have whether they are doing SS, Lean, or whatever.
    As far as teaching tools it is a safety zone for an instructor. No controversy. Control the data sets. Calculations are hard wired etc. They are taught by tool Zombies and they create tool Zombies. When I was certified to SCUBA dive my instructor did the cert in the ocean (Gulf of California actually). He said if we were trained in a swimming pool we would eventually become good pool divers. Projects are the stop gap for creating tool zombies (pool divers).
    I was shocked on one occasion when I was sitting ina hotel room with 3 people who were certified by my company at one time. They all had the same instructor – a person with excellent knowledge of tools.- and felt the training was poor at best. If you have a poor classroom instructor tell them.
    If the idea of working on material/training is a serious one check out the thing called Blooms Taxonomy. It can help some.
    There are people out there such as Scott Ashby and Shar Stocker who are experts at designing materials. If you want decent material put a good material designer with a good SME (Subject Matter Expert) and you will get a better result.
    Just my opinion.

    0
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

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