iSixSigma

Statistics Six Sigma

Six Sigma – iSixSigma Forums Old Forums General Statistics Six Sigma

This topic contains 89 replies, has 27 voices, and was last updated by  LMAO 12 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 90 posts - 1 through 90 (of 90 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #47684

    Craig
    Participant

    A quote that struck me many years ago goes like this:
    “The long range contribution of statistics depends not so much upon getting a lot of highly trained statisticians into industry as it does in creating a statistically minded generation of physicists, chemists, engineers, and others who will in any way have a hand in developing and directing the production processes of tomorrow.”        W.A. Shewhart and W.E. Deming
    This seemed relevant back when Deming was preaching statistical methods in Japan, and seems to be part of the foundation of Six Sigma. At least for me (because of reading their quote), I delved into statistical methods and one day my manager said “we want you to become a black belt!”.
    How much of Six Sigma is about statistics in your opinion? I hope this generates healthy discussion!
     
     

    0
    #159242

    M. Salim MSA
    Participant

    in short ” statistics is too important to be left for the statisticians ”   so if six sigma was all about statistics, then this would not hold true any more …. and all statisticians would become great black belts …..
    it’s more about Business Process Improvement to achieve world class results by delivering defect free products and services and using a structured methodology ….

    0
    #159260

    Craig
    Participant

    Whose quote is that? Sounds interesting, but I don’t agree that statisticians would  become black belts. Most are tasked with doing complicated data analysis, but don’t necessarily fix processes.

    0
    #159261

    Chad Taylor
    Participant

    HACL,  
    Agree very much so. Seems to me that top management seems to be more interested in the statistics and the presentation of them, than actually letting the Physist, Chemist, and Engineers do their trained job. Stats will only get you so far……….Paralysis by Analysis
     

    0
    #159262

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    hacl,
    There is a place for both. Most companies that we have been involved with have process issues that don’t require analysis beyond the tools we teach in the DMAIC methodology. As the general level of the company improves there is a segment of the MBB/BB population that becomes more sophisticated in the tools they are experienced with so the skill sets match the issues that need to be delt with.
    When we were doing the GE deployment in 1996 there were statisticians in almost every plant. In Cincinnatti we had a guy named Jeff Heslop who was a statistician who took responsibility for training Belts. He did a great job and was very good at the application. There were others who chose not to become belts but were very supportive of the Belts. The Lynn plant had a great guy that was like that. I don’t remember his name but he made a big difference in the quality of the projects.
    The biggest difference we see is when the management team become aware of what data means. It is the questions they ask and their expectations that change the culture which is what we are really after.
    You get people in the general population of the companies that don’t want to deal with the math. More often than not it is the territorial behavior of some of the statisticians and people in the quality roles that really damage the efforts to move a company that deals in a company that speaks in terms of just an average versus a company that uses more comprehensive statistical analysis.
    Just my opinion

    0
    #159269

    Hman
    Participant

    In our company – where we are deploying six sigma from zero – it’s roughly 80% Change Management and 20% Statistics&Tools. But the 80% is talking about why data, statistics and the methodology is so important to improve business critical processes.

    0
    #159271

    Omashi Sabachi
    Participant

    First  you  should  not  deploy  SS from  Zero?You  have  to prepare  your  company  for  at  least  one  year  to  accept  the  SS Approach.This  why  your  people  are  asking  the   wrong  questions?
    good luck

    0
    #159373

    Craig
    Participant

    Mike Carnell,
    Thanks for the insight. The reason I ask this question is because I don’t see much evidence of Six Sigma tools in some projects, and statistics falls into the “no show” category. Regarding the projects that I mentor, I do my best to help the candidate pick the right tool for the situation and then guide them through the process. (Statistical tools and otherwise).
    What would you consider as 10 critical skills from a certified black belt? This question goes out to everyone…not just Mike!  :-)
     

    0
    #159374

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    hacl:
    Thanks for sharing the quote. I always believed this approach and practiced. That’s why I developed the Stat Free Six Sigma approach. Was it a joint statement by Shewhart and Deming?
    Statistical thinking is more important than statistical tools.
    Praveen

    0
    #159377

    Articles on BB certification
    Participant

    There was a whole flurry of articles on six sigma certification, statistical tools and BB’s vs. Statisticians at the end of the 90’s (primarily driven by Hoerl). The essence of the articles converges with Mike’s and Praveen’s points: The core of the exercise is change management. Statistical tools are just that: tools … and there are many ways to go about root cause analyses.

    0
    #159380

    Mikel
    Member

    Praveen, you don’t get it.
    Statistical thinking depends on some understanding of statistics. You can’t get there in a stat free environment.
    Conjured any sigma levels lately?

    0
    #159382

    iSixSigma-Editorial
    Keymaster

    Please  elaborate  more
    What  is  the  main  difference between GBs and BBs if both will  use  the  same  limited  simple  statistical  tools?
    thanks

    0
    #159401

    Craig
    Participant

    I read this quote in a few different sources. The one I can recall is Grant & Leavenworth’s SPC book. (Towards the beginning) It is always depicted as a joint statement.
    My take on this is that we need to be experts in applying  the statistical tools, but not necessarily statisticians. You obviously want PhD statisticians in industries like pharaceuticals, biotech, etc.
    Just my 2 cents!

    0
    #159402

    drquality
    Participant

    Not sure I have 10, but here it goes. And respect what Mike has to say, he is good at what he does.

    Have they learned the business and its purpose? What numbers do they want to make go up and what numbers do they want to make go down? And why? What are the money and customer satisfaction results these numbers will result in?
    Have they the ability to communicate with top managers and shop floor employees the importance of the project(s) and the tools used to improve the processes targeted?
    Do they know what the nature of the process is and what sort of numbers it produces (normal, poisson, quadratic, etc.)?
    Do they know how to verify the precision and accuracy of these measures (precision being more important in my opinion)?
    Have they become proficient in and using statistics and other tools to determine ways to improve the process? 
    Do they have a good training demeanor? Does the audience, Champions to Green Belts, understand and buy-in to what s/he is teaching? Do they understand and support how to make the various tools work?
    Is s/he able to insure that the tools taught to all are being applied appropriately? Is this person able to correct any misapplications without creating anger or controversy?
    Is s/he able to design and plan the use of statistical techniques to identify improvements to the process? Is s/he able to use the applications to prove the improvements?
    Is s/he able to guide and insure the proper application of the above tools?
    Was s/he able to verify and explain and gain acceptance from the business to implement the identified improvements?
    Did s/he verify with management and employees that the proposed improvements resulted in what were the expected improvements?
    Darn me, I came up with more than 10 off the top of my head. There are likly more or better qualifications. Keep asking around. But I hope mine help.
     
    Good Luck,
     
    Dr. Scott

    0
    #159405

    Chad Taylor
    Participant

    Admin
    The main difference in GB and BB is that BB will often direct GB projects. “GB’s”, although trained in the same relm of SS, lack the experience to begin and complete projects without some role model and direction. This is not to say that some GB’s are not capable and may need very minimal supervision, but it has been my experience that another “eye” on the project can make the project much simplier and/or rewarding to the GB’s.
    Just my 2 cents
    Chad Taylor

    0
    #159408

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Stan:
    Are you still having difficulty in calculating sigma level using my Six Sigma Business Scorecard methodology? Now it is available in Chinese, Korean, and Lithuanian languages. More help for you!
    Without monitoring Sigma levels, leadership support for the Sigma initiative can not be sustained for long. The executive support will vary like the stock market.
    – Praveen

    0
    #159420

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Praveen Gupta, I must agree with your position on this issue.  I thought you might appreciate this example taken from my Black Belt training experience.  It is a very simple way to roll-up the quality metrics for a process, then use the same spreadsheet to roll-up multiple processes to the factory level.  This method of calulating Sigmas can ultimately be taken to the business unit level and corporate level.  My management has been using this system with great success.
    For purposes of display, some of the column numbers have been rounded following their computation.

    CTQ

    Defects

    Units

    Opportunities

    TOP

    DPU

    DPO

    DPMO

    Shift

    Sigma

    A

    268

    4,020

    1

    4,020

    0.067

    0.06667

    66,670

    1.5

    3.00

    B

    502

    4,020

    10

    40,200

    0.125

    0.01249

    12,490

    1.5

    3.74

    C

    4,544

    4,020

    5

    20,100

    1.130

    0.22607

    226,070

    1.5

    2.25

    D

    1,307

    4,020

    2

    8,040

    0.325

    0.16256

    162,560

    1.5

    2.48

    E

    75

    4,020

    3

    12,060

    0.019

    0.00622

    6,220

    1.5

    4.00

    F

    2,006

    4,020

    7

    28,140

    0.499

    0.07129

    71,290

    1.5

    2.97

    G

    431

    4,020

    4

    16,080

    0.107

    0.0268

    26,800

    1.5

    3.43

    H

    594

    4,020

    635

    2,552,700

    0.148

    0.00023

    230

    1.5

    5.00

    I

    24

    4,020

    38

    152,760

    0.006

    0.00016

    160

    1.5

    5.10

    J

    3,642

    4,020

    50

    201,000

    0.906

    0.01812

    18,120

    1.5

    3.59

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Grand

    13,393

     

     

    3,035,100

     

    0.00441

    4410

    1.5

    4.12
     
    CTQ = Critical To Quality Characteristic
    D = Defects
    U = Units Produced
    TOP = Total Opportunities Produced
    DPU = Defects Per Unit
    DPO = Defects Per Opportunity
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159421

    Almudena
    Participant

    Praveen,
    Will please you please explain the difference between six sigma level and six sigma capability?
    Why do you use six sigma level as a metric for the business scorecard rather than six sigma capability?
    I would appreciate your insight on this and/or a reference on this.
    Thanks
    Almudena

    0
    #159422

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Almudena, I can not speak for Praveen since I have not read his book, but would rather suspect that his reference to the sigma level is the same as sigma capability. 
    To me, the meaning of a 4 sigma level is saying the capability of the referenced level (tier) is 4 sigma, like a “level” within the product or process heirarchy/tree.  A 4 sigma assembly level would mean that the average capability of an assembly is 4 sigma.  A 3.5 sigma report at the factory level would mean that the average factory is 3.5 sigma capable.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159424

    iSixSigma-Editorial
    Keymaster

    With all  your  jnowledge  you  should  be  a MBB? Are  you?

    0
    #159425

    iSixSigma-Editorial
    Keymaster

    Thank You  for  your  informative  reply.
    What  about  the advanced statistical  tools ,such  as DEO,ANOVA,Test of  Hypothesis,F Dist.,Chi-test  ,T-Test,etc.?
    What  is  the  role  of  the BB in  this  regard?
     

    0
    #159426

    iSixSigma-Editorial
    Keymaster

    6-Sigma is  equal  to 2 Cp (Cabability Index)
    5-Sigam is  equal  to 1.67 Cp
    4-Sigma  is  equal  to 1.33 Cp
    3-Sigma  is  equal to 1.00 Cp
    Good Luck 

    0
    #159436

    Historiography
    Participant

    Just out of pure curiosity, is this “canned” data? If not, what process has 635 opportunties for defects (Really just curious here :-). Thanks!

    0
    #159439

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Jim:
    Congratulations for successful implementation of Six Sigma. I have not heard many companies tracking overall Sigma level. Actually, you may be the first after Motorola long time ago when it announced the corporate Sigma level at 5.4. Thanks for sharing the example. We need allies to maximize benefits of Six Sigma at the corporate level through the right metrics. If you would like to exchange information about the corporate sigma level, I will be happy to get your information. My email is praveen@accelper.com.
    Thanks,
    praveen

    0
    #159441

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Almudena:
    Jim has explained it correctly. Sigma level is a measure of the capability. Again, Sigma level is more meaningful at the corporate level as it accelerates change. Besides, we should be able to relate Sigma level to the financial performance of the company, and use the Sigma level as a leading indicator.  The way I use measures is as follows:
    DPU – Customer measure of performance (customer wants zero defect)
    DPMO – Process level measure (we need to know opportunities that can cause errors or defects)
    Sigma – Business level measure (creates a common language, and incremental change in sigma level means a lot of change in DPMO).
    Praveen

    0
    #159442

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Some assembly processes used complex boards with as many as 5000 connections, or systems with as many as 5000 parts. Higher complexity of systems also contributed to development of Six Sigma.

    0
    #159444

    Historiography
    Participant

    Praveen,
    Is the Sigma level at the corporate level the newest device in predicting financial performance, i.e. a competitor to the balanced scorecard, satisfaction measures etc.? They all have failed because they give a snapshot of existing performance, just like the financial performance measures, do not take into consideration industry dynamics. What exactly do you call “an organization” given the complex relationship of interlocking interests and arrangements. Also, it assumes that the sigma score is a valid measurement (I have my doubts about the 1.5 sigma shift, as do some others), and how does that scoring scheme apply to service organizations. Finally, what financial performance are you talking about. There is the whole dynamic of valuation of stocks that is only partly related to current operational performance and is discounted as soon as information is released. Are you talking about measures of stock valuation, balance sheet measures such as market value, book value, income statement measures such as revenues, operating profits, EBIT …. “We need fans” is fine, but for what? I am not sure what “club” I’d be signing up for if I followed your advice. Finally, to what degree does a “prediction”, i.e. correlation between overall sigma score and “financial measures” establish a causal relationship.

    0
    #159449

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Historiography, you ask if the Sigma score is a valid measurement, which is a really pertinent inquiry.  However, reflecting upon your question, I’m not really sure what you mean (context wise) when attaching the word “valid” as an adjective to the word “measurement.”  Is your context related to theoretical validity, operational validity and/or business validity?  Are you referring to the extent of correlation that might/should exist between the Sigma score and certain other business or operational measures?  Not wanting to make any assumptions, I thought I should ask before I leap to conclusions.  Thank you in advance for your clarification.
     
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159450

    Historiography
    Participant

    Jim,
    In this case it simply means the following: The sigma calculation assumes the 1.5 sigma shift (long-term). Does this really occur across different organizations, industries and processes when the original calculation methodology was done in one organization (Motorola) with one process and product (disc production) and the data were never published (… that’s at least my current knowledge, and if anybody could tell me where any published data is, I’d be very grateful). Technically you’re dealing with validity generalization, but here I am taking off my acadmic hat and simply look at it from a practicioner’s point of view. I’ll be interested to hear what Praveen has to say about it. I hope this helps.

    0
    #159451

    Mikel
    Member

    Wrong. management support goes with results. Any management
    team that depend on sigma score for motivation either don’t
    understand or they are idiots.And no, I am not having trouble conjuring sigma scores with your
    method. I prefer to use real data.

    0
    #159455

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Stan, maybe I can help you better understand how to compute a Sigma score.  Once you get a handle on how this is done, you will be able to better grasp the management implications.  Here is the way I learned how to do it:
    1. Assume an example in which a unit of product is defined by K number of defect opportunities and all defects are randomly distributed throughout the unit.
     
    2. If each unit of product contains 10 defect opportunities and the measured quality level is DPU = 1.0, the probability of a “defect free” unit of product would be 100[1-(1/10)] = 90%. 
     
    3. If that same unit of product contained 100 defect opportunities, the probability of a “defect free” unit of product would be 100[1-(1/100)] = 99%.
     
    4. If that same unit of product contained 1,000 defect opportunities, the probability of a “defect free” unit of product would be 100[1-(1/1,000)] = 99.9%.
     
    5. If that same unit of product contained 10,000 defect opportunities, the probability of a “defect free” unit of product would be 100[1-(1/10,000)] = 99.99%.
     
    6. This way of reasoning would logically continue through an infinite number of opportunities.  Plotting the results of these calculations would show that, as the number of defect opportunities approaches infinity, the probability of zero defects asymptotically approaches e^-DPU.  Making this calculation for the example shows us that the probability of zero defects would be e^-1 = 0.367879441.  This means that 1 out of 2.72 units will contain at least one defect.
     
    7. Reversing this process would show us that for the situation DPU = 1.0 and 1,000 defect opportunities, the probability of a defect free opportunity would be (e^-1)^(1/1,000) = 0.367879441^(1/1,000) = .999.  To find the corresponding Z score for a probability of .999 we can use Excel to calculate Normsinv(.999) = 3.09.  The Sigma score is calculated as Z + 1.5 = 3.09 + 1.5 = 4.59.
     
    By finding the Sigma score for all your key products, services and processes you are better positioned to prioritize your improvement focus and efforts.  You can discover who has the best quality regardless of product or process complexity.  You can then correlate the Sigma scores against other operational and business metrics.  Its absolutely amazing what you can discover about your business.
     
    If you need some additional help with these concepts, I will do my best to guide you through some discussion.  I am sure Praveen will also pitch in and help you.  It sounds like Praveen’s book is really good.  You might want to consider reading it.  I know I’m going to get a copy of it this week.
     
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159464

    Mikel
    Member

    Jim,Do you know what you are agreeing with? Praveen don’t need no
    stinking data to get his sigma levels.

    0
    #159465

    Mikel
    Member

    Disc production?Where did you get that?

    0
    #159469

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Stan, your response to Praveen is quite strong.  Are you saying Praveen “manufactures” his own data and Sigma levels?  From his posts, he does not seem like the type of individual that would do this!  To follow up on your assertion, I did a quick Internet search on “Praveen Gupta” and, based on a scan of the returns, his credentials seem quite sound. 
    What exactly are you saying by the statement “Praveen don’t need no stinking data to get his sigma levels.”  I’m not questioning your statement or judgement, only seeking specific clarifications.  If you believe he misleads with statistics or inapproriately interprets real data, that’s one thing, but if you are saying he invents data, that’s quite another.  Please elaborate now that you have turned the rock over to expose what might be underneath.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159472

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    Jim, the post was written by the ever so friendly and charming good side of Stan. The loving and caring relationship between Praveen and Stan is almost legendary. That’s how they communicate how fond they are of each other.

    0
    #159474

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Historiography, the use of a 1.5 sigma shift has been the center of debate for quite some time now, especially on this site.  Personally, I don’t really want to open this can of worms and subject myself to the flurry of attacks that will assuredly ensue from the camp of resistance.  So I will keep my discussion about the shift relatively short and sweet and in the context of what I do.  These are my personal views based on my experience, six sigma education and Internet research.
     
    My understanding about the shift is as follows:
     
    1. It is NOT a constant, contrary to what some might say.  It is NOT intended (from what I can determine) as a way to FORECAST short term performance by knowing the long term performance, or vice versa.
     
    2. It does seem to have some theoretical merit, both statistically and empirically.  The EXTENT to which these merits are “true” seems to be at the core of the ongoing debates and arguments
     
    3. It is used to transform long term capability metrics to short term capability metrics. If the long term metric is based on discrete or attribute data (like DPU or Yield), and short term continuous data is not available, then the 1.5 shift can be brought into play to make a rational MODEL to describe what the short term capability might look like under the assumption that common levels of assignable causes are present over time.  Use of the 1.5 shift assumes the process is NOT under statistical process controls (as most processes are not).
     
    4. It is sometimes used in the sense of worst case analysis, process capability modeling and benchmarking
     
    5. It is sometimes used used to create Sigma benchmarking charts
     
    6. It is NOT connected to the use of control charts
     
    I believe the biggest misunderstanding among novices is that the 1.5 shift is a constant and should always be used in that way.  Common sense would say that if you have both short term and long term data available to you, then it would be easy to compute the actual shift.  However, if one of the two forms of data (short or long term) is not available, then depending on your purpose; you might want to include the 1.5 shift, or some other reasonable number to model the missing piece.
     
    Here is an example useage:
     
    If the yield of a process is 99% and is calculated through the use of discrete/attribute data and there are 500 opportunities for defect throughout the process, the yield per process opportunity would be .99^(1/500) = .99998.  This level of yield would then be converted to a Z value in Excel by calculating Z = Normsinv(.99998) = 4.106.  Rounded, this would be about 4.1 Sigma. 
     
    Since this Sigma score was based on yield data, then that data would presumably have been collected over a relatively long period of time.  During this period of time it is quite possible (if not probable) that assignable causes would occasionally be present and their presence would adversely affect the mean and bias the yield data over time. 
     
    However, since discrete/attribute data was used to compute the long term capability, we would NOT have a DIRECT measure of process centering.  Just knowing the assignable causes would throw it off target for some period of time provides the justification to “adjust out” the influence of assignable causes in an effort to establish a short term MODEL of the process capability.
     
    When this is done for a wide array of product characteristics, it is possible to plot all of the short term Sigma scores on a benchmark chart and examine the commonalities among the characteristics that have high Sigma scores. The same would be done for the characteristics with low Sigma scores.  In this way you can discover many things.
     
    In contrast to this, you would have a wide mixture of capability metrics (yield, dpu, cp, cpk, dpmo, ppk, cpm etc) across many CTQs.  Some of these metrics are short term and others are more long term.  Without some way to convert all of the metrics to a common metric on a common time scale, it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about the common threads of success.
     
    Jim Ace
     

    0
    #159475

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Stan, I got it now!  The accussations are unfounded and lack merit.  What you are saying is that your comments simply represent your extreme dislike of Praveen, but on a very personal level.  I hope you don’t mind if I bow-out of this conflict between the two of you! 
    I much prefer to judge people on the basis of their contributions and credentials, not their personalities.  Personally, I like to keep things on a professional level.  Actually, I am attracted to kind people, so it is not likely I will bond or side with those that point fingers without a hand to support those fingers. 
    Enjoy your legendary status and love affair with Praveen, but in the interim, it would seem that Praveen is doing a great job of advancing his ideas and you are coming up short.  Thus far, you have provided no evidence to reinforce your position.  In the way of six sigma: “Let the data do the talking.”
    Best of luck with your personal battles and dual personality,
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159476

    Jim Shelor
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
    That is the best, most understandable explaination of the 1.5 sigma shift I have ever read.
    I have just one question.  When you said:
    “Use of the 1.5 shift assumes the process is NOT under statistical process controls (as most processes are not).”
    Did you mean the process was not being controlled using Statistical Process Controls, or the process was not necessarily under control?
    Thanks for the great explaination.
    Respects,
    Jim Shelor

    0
    #159477

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    Stan,
    I finally understand your “sympathy” for lovely Praveen Gupta. I went through his new book: What a Bxxlcrxx!!!!!! Any more detailed review would give this piece of Bxxlcrxx too much merit. This is a boring “Me Too” book.

    0
    #159478

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Jim Shelor, I appreciate your gratious reply to my posting concerning the 1.5 sigma shift.  From the many processes I have been exposed to, including industrial, service and transactional, the vast majority do not use statistical process control methods to monitor variations.  At best, these processes employ standard QA proceedures and inspection methods and then report the most elementary of metrics, often rooted in discrete/attribute data, but seldom pooled to the business level.  Since these processes are often operated without SPC measures, there is little that can be done to control process centering errors in a real time manner.  Because of this, the long term capability must be adjusted to compensate for the influence of assignable causes over time if one is attempting to build a short term capbility model.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159480

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    By the way, does Praveen even have the slightest clue about economics? He puts a pathetic 4 or 5 row table into the introduction trying to convince the reader that the government cut tax spending after a slowdown in growth which then “caused” the recovery of the economy. The guy should team up with O’Reilly. The book is crappy op-ed journalism at best!!!!

    0
    #159483

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    I guess I have been too harsh on Praveen. The guy has a Master’s in engineering, (that’s good) is a consultant (successful one must say), and a “professor” without a PhD (oh well, they keep on growing in numbers … that’s how these DePaul Universities keep their costs low). So, the book is what it is: A nice marketing tool for Praveen’s consulting company. Not much depth, a lot of anecdotes and very prescriptive … like all of these little anecdotic “business” books it promotes the gloom that if you don’t jump on the wagon you’re doomed. Oh well, another book that one can pass on without losing much sleep. I hope the sales numbers far exceed the quality of the content!

    0
    #159484

    Almudena
    Participant

    Jim,
    Thank you for sharing this example. I would appreciate if you could explain the difference between sigma capability and sigma level and its relationship with the Cpk. Any reference would be greatly appreciated.
    Thanks
    Almudena
     

    0
    #159485

    Jim Shelor
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
     
    I agree that your report provides a good way to determine which quality characteristic should receive attention (at least after taking ROI, etc into account), but I think there may be an important piece of information missing from this analysis.
     
    Many of the units shipped are going to contain more than 1 of the specified 10 CTQ defects.  Accordingly, the DMPO shown, while very valuable to the internal operations of your organization, does not show an indication of customer satisfaction.
     
    I think an additional line showing how many units reached the customer that were defective and the sigma level for that is important.
     
    In my experience, not as plentiful as yours, the customer doesn’t much care how many opportunities there were for making an error in his unit.  He cares that his unit does not perform as expected and requires repair or replacement.
     
    This analysis may give you a fresh perspective on which CTQ is most important to correct first.
     
    Best regards,
     
    Jim Shelor

    0
    #159487

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Dear Stan:
    Thanks for sharing my qualifications with everyone which I could not do! Knowing you throgh this chat at iSixSigma, you are pretty gutsy to criticize my ideas (which is welcome because it makes me better), my qualifications (I can not change), and my institutions (they are so good their reputation will not be harmed by one person’s comments), and condemning my books (that I hope is not too harmful).
    I do know that it is very easy to criticize, but very very difficult to create a new solution. Any of my work is not a fluke, instead it is based on my experience of 25 years, work with over 100 companies with great results, and previlege to work with people at Motorola, DePaul, Illinois Institute of Technology, and many other organizations.
    I come to iSixSigma to exchange ideas. In doing so, I try to learn good things first in a new idea before I criticize for improvement. Killing is not a good use of the iSixSigma forum. So, please don’t kill my ideas instead criticize based on facts. Of course you do have freedom of speech. People are smart enough to know the truth.
    I am sure everyone here would love learn about your qualifications, which I am sure far superior than mine, experience, and ideas. Go ahead with all the experience you have gained teach us some thing which we are missing. I will be the first one to learn. I learned at Motorola to steal (legally) good ideas shamelessly!
    Keep Stan’s good side alive, and evil side hidden!
    Praveen
    BTW: DePaul’s Enterpreneurship program was rated #2, and part-time MBA program top ten, both nationally. 
      

    0
    #159488

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Historiography:
    You have asked some very good questions. I have tried to answer some of them for myself. I can share them with you. Agreeing with you about the failure of Balanced Scorecard, Satisfaction meausres, etc., I was asked by McGraw Hill to develop a measurement system based on one my measures of six sigma column many years ago (2002), which I did. As a result, the measurement system is called Six Sigma Business Scorecard (or simply Business Scorecard vs. the Balanced Scorecard), that is based on ten high level measurements in seven interlocking categories (vs. four perspectives). Because of assigned significance to various categories and measurements, process sigma level gets about 20% significance, thus not much affected by 1.5 Sigma shift.
    The scorecard was developed to optimization of business processes for profitable growth. Thus measurements relate to profit and growth. Here is a link for some more info:
    http://qualitydigest.com/IQedit/QDarticle_text.lasso?articleid=4546&-session=ACCESS:47C903C31394f24F13nXnt318A86
    The main intent was to come up with a leading set of operations measures to predict top and bottom line. Other financial measures are influenced by outside uncontrolled factors. Do I have a perfect solution? I wish. As somebody said it here, if I did, I would be a trillionaire. I don’t even want to dream!
    I hope it helps.
    Praveen

    0
    #159490

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    Praveen,
    I really don’t care what people on this side may or may not think. This is a site that has more to do with the religion of six sigma than with the practice of business problem solving. Just like I have the right of free speech, you have every right to make money off your books and publish them. More power to you.
    However, the macroeconomic table in your introductory pages sheds some serious doubts about your credibility as a serious author. The “data” about the macroeconomic scrutiny of “objectives” of the economy are hardly any support for the claim that you make and are anecdotal at best. They lack a basic understanding about the workings of feedback mechanisms in an economy and are not substantiated by any serious research in economics and the impact of fiscal policy on macroeconomic behavior and outcomes. At this point what you present as fact is at best a hypothesis and a politically charged one to say the least. The table is a nice dramatization, but qualifies as journalism. In addition, your very first sentence already makes a statement that is at best a non-corroborated hypothesis.
    As I stated before, it’s a nice piece of business literature that promotes you newest line of service. I hope you’ll make good money with it, and continue to develop your reputation in your industry. My suggestion: On issues like the one’s mentioned above, get some feedback from knowledgeable colleagues who can help you avoid my kind of “gutsy” criticism. Given that you have testified in front of the Illinois Senate, and have access to resources in various Universities it should be easy for you to get some feedback. I also hope you’ll increase your “fan club” (BTW: if you hadn’t used that term, I would never have looked behind the curtain. It smacks just too much of the smoke and mirrors assoicated with the pop culture of teeny rock bands or for that matter the pop culture of the mass production of prescriptive business books).  

    0
    #159491

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Praveen Gupta, you offer a wonderful reference for your version of what a balanced score card should be.  However, I must admit that once I reviewed the basis of your calculations, it does appear somewhat arbitrary, relatively subjective and somewhat fuzzy around the edges.  I am not agreeing with Stan (yet), but must admit that things look a little weird here.  But unlike others, I am very open minded and seek enlightenment.
     
    Perhaps it is my lack of understanding or maybe there is a set of statistics which I have not previously encountered in my six sigma work, but either way, I really need some clarification to better grasp the import of your teachings.  To quickly drill down, please respond to the following questions:
     

    Are the “importance levels” and “weightings” arbitrarily established?
    Is the reported “DPU” a measure of defects per unit?
    Is the opportunity count based on number of executives?
    Does the Sigma score rely on data derived from points 2 or 3?
    Do you consider your scorecard a measurement system?
    Do you consider your scorecard a rating system?
    I am diligently trying to ascertain whether or not your methods for computing indices of capability (like DPU and Sigma) are borne of statistics or represent measures which you invented.  If the measures are rooted in mathematics, their relationship to business measures can be easily established and evaluated.  On the other hand, if your indices and calculations are merely “arbitrary ratings,” then their relationship to the key business metrics would need to be empirically established through tools like regression.  If so, do you have the emperical studies that underlie these ratings?  What business metrics were correlated? What were the r values?
     
    I am not here to pounce on your work, rain on your parade or call your baby “ugly” (like others might attempt).  I am a serious student of six sigma and continually seek new tools and ways of thinking, but at the same time, I want science based tools, not a contrived rating system.  If the system you propose is actually a rating system vice a measurement system, then why not use a likert-based rating system that is distributed to key personnel?  Why go through all the hoops of Sigma scores, DPUs and so on?  On the other hand, if the system is based in the theories of “measurement,” then I am all ears and commit to be your humble student to learn these ways.  Again, thank you in advance for your kind discussions and contributions.
     
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159492

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Jim Shelor, I fully agree with your assessment and do appreciate your commentary.  The table I offered represents only one of several key measures that a business should embrace.  My table is restricted to defects and, because of this, reports on quality.  You are right in saying that customer satisfaction should also be considered. 
    Perhaps these other measures (in addition to the quality metrics) could be summarized into a single chart.  This chart would nicely reflect all of the key dimensions of a successful business and could be reported on a regular basis, complete with goal lines.  In this way a business executive can get a bird’s eye view of what’s really going on in the business trenches and see what metrics track together over time.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159493

    Historiography
    Participant

    Praveen,
    Thanks for taking the time to respond. It puts the book into perspective. It also gives a starting point to look into the differences between Balanced Scorecard and your approach in more detail.
     

    0
    #159494

    Historiography
    Participant

    Is this Jim talking to himself :-)? Or has Praveen taken on a new name?

    0
    #159495

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
    Rather than spend all your time reseaching his credentials just read the book. He is selling a non data approach to calculating sigma. That seems to be a bit of an oxymoron. That doesn’t take research and your ambiguous judgement of what seems quite sound.
    ….does not seem to be the type of individual that would do this! Read In Search of Excellence. Nobody ever thought thatPeters and Waterman were the type to manufacture data but years later Peters admitted it. Maybe that is why Waterman had to go commune with nature for a while.
    Gupta is selling to the crowd that is scared to death of data. It is smoke and mirrors vaguely remaniscent of Harry. Come to think of it your posts remind me of someone. Reigle? Is that you Reigle?
    Lebowski

    0
    #159496

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
    Pretty strong words for someone who is to lazy to read the guys book. Stan has read it but because you are a professional and want to let the data do the talking you want to impune Stan. It looka a lot more like your discription of Stan is better suited to you.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159497

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Gupta,
    What complete nonsense. How about doing what your lap dog Jim Ace says and let the data do the taking. Where is your data that proves that a corporate level sigma accelerates change. That is snake oil and smoke and mirrors.
    You assert that DPMO and Sigma drive to different things. Nonsense. They are two different numbers that represent the same thing. why would that drive two different things? More snakeoil.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159498

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Stan’s evil side,
    Since you weren’t to impressed with that dribble that Gupta wrote why don’t you send it to Jim Ace so he can stop reasearching, pronouncing himself a professional and start reading the nonsense he is defending.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159499

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Lebowski, your words might be right on target, but as indicated earlier in this discussion, I will be aquiring the book this weekend and, after reading it thoroughly, will draw my own conclusions.  The questions I have posed to Praveen will help shape my perspective as I progress through the book.  Perhaps you might like to respond to my questions?  Probably not, huh? 
    If you want to call me lazy without knowing me, that is OK by me.  I got really thick skin.  I certainly did not get to where I am by being lazy or overly sensitive.  Neither did you or many other learned people on this site!  But I’m sure (by your posts) it makes you feel good saying ill things about others you don’t even know and have never conversed with.  Deep in your heart you know kindness is much better!
    I’ll bet you see yourself towering above others, especially me.  You probably even believe that others admire you for your tremendous leadership on this site and think your rock’em and sock’em attitude is a good thing that “tells the man a thing or two.” 
    If you want me to be lazy, OK.  If you want me to be stupid, OK.  I’ll even be a moron for you!  Call me gay, call me short, call be ignorant, I’ll admit to anything.  Why?  Becasue when I leave this forum, I return to a wonderful family that is filled with love and compassion for others (even you).  You should also know that my parents and children might even agree with you, maybe even my wife!  But again, when the joy of this agreement has passed, I will continue to enjoy a lot of love and kindness in my life.
    Perhaps you did not read through the other posts in this thread before pulling the trigger.  Off the subject at hand, it is curiously coincidental that your appearance seemingly and consistently coincides with Stan’s.  Looks like Stan might have more than two personalities!
    Come on and sling some more mud at me and others, its a good laugh!  Unfortunately, we might be laughing at you, not what you say.  God bless you and your multiple personalities and enjoy your life to its fullest in any way you can.  Perhaps the true value of your contributions is one of cyber entertainment, not knowledge.  Something to think about.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159500

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    Lebowski,
    That would defeat the purpose of the book: collecting royalties for the number of copies sold  :-)))).

    0
    #159501

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Stan’s Evil Side, you make an very, very, very good point!  Maybe the purpose of Praveen’s book really IS to collect royalties for the number of copies sold.  This is an excellent idea.  It is a much better idea than posting garbage on this forum with NO royalties.  Could it be that Praveen is smarter than you and I put together?  After all he is making money pushing his ideas and we are not.  He is not wrong about everything; neither are we.  He is not right about everything; neither are we.  But he is making money while we make nothing.  Maybe he is sitting back really laughing at us while he endorses his royalty checks.  Maybe he is a better businessman after all!  How much royalty does an author get when a book is published?  Let’s piece together various posts from this forum, paraphrase the text (so we do not transgress copyrights) and then put our book on the market.  Then we can cash in on this phenomenon too!  Do you want to be the primary author or should I be.  Maybe Lebowski should be, huh?
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159502

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Jim Ace, would you please kindly refrain from posting under my fourm name, Jim Ace.  The real Jim Ace would never say “very, very, very”  Call yourself Ace Jim, Diamond Jim, Jim Diamond, Jim Club or King Jim, Jack of Jim, but not Jim Ace.  Thank you for your consideration.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159503

    Stan’s evil side
    Member

    Jim Ace, Thanks for the offer, but I do not publish with novices of the annal retentive and nerdy variety that you represent and that cannot even insult another without sounding silly. Maybe after you have at least moved up to the intellectual maturity level of a child that has passed the dogmatic stage and moved into the critical stage, we may talk about it again. Until then, enjoy the love of your family.

    0
    #159504

    For the other Jim Ace
    Participant

    Whoever this Jim Ace is: You are making the fatal and flawed assumption, namely that I am not making royalties off my published work, receive honorary speaker’s fees etc. How about you being the fool who doesn’t understand the business of publishing, consulting, teaching at business schools, networking and getting his word out. You’re obviously extremely new to the business of selling six sigma. Nice try though :-)))))).

    0
    #159505

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Stan:
    Macroeconomic table is not the main point of the book. It is only a start. Review chapter 4 that should provide details of the scorecard.
    In any case, it appears that you are not satisfied with my Six Sigma Business Scorecard book. I will be glad to buy it back from you for full purchase price. Even though I do not make 100% royalty, I will be willing to bite the dust being your iSixSigma colleague.
    I hope it will alleviate some pain, and give peace. Sorry, my book/ work aggravated you so much. In future, may I suggest to you to ignore my work.
    One thing for sure, you have searched my website, read my bio or resume in detail. That is shows your excellent detective work.
    praveen

    0
    #159506

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Jim Ace:
    You have asked some good questions, which some of the participants here may think these are planted questions. To me these are genuine questions that need be answered.
    First of all, I take ownership for developing or inventing the new business scorecard by integrating Six Sigma intent and Balanced Scorecard framework. I developed this because I believe companies need to measure their Sigma level in order to sustain the Six Sigma initiative, and to follow its main tenet, i.e., measure what you value. If you are implementing Six Sigma, investing so much resources, we must measure it to monitor progress.
    To your questions, I will give brief responses. I hope that would help.

    Are the “importance levels” and “weightings” arbitrarily established? The significance of various elements is established based on my experience in dozens of companies, statistical analysis, and discussion with experts. The purpose is to develop a measurement system that would correlate with the reality.
    2. Is the reported “DPU” a measure of defects per unit?  – Yes, but calculated based on the performance of key processes, tangibles or intangibles.
    3.Is the opportunity count based on number of executives? Yes, making them accountable for all the problems in the company. What’s wrong with that?
    4. Does the Sigma score rely on data derived from points 2 or 3? Yes.
    5. Do you consider your scorecard a measurement system? Yes
    6. Do you consider your scorecard a rating system? – The scorecard aggregates all measurements into single measure called Business Performance Index (BPIn). This could be used to rate organizations for benchmarking purpose or identifying areas for improvement.
     
    There is a chapter in the book for validating the scorecard. However, the book also says that it is an initial framework for developing a holistic scorecard that can provide some business intelligence. Not in the exact words.
     
    Regards,
    praveen

    0
    #159507

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Praveen Gupta, I wish to thank you for your kind and informative response.  Your answers were to the point and most candid.  Your time to formulate a response is greatly appreciated.  I will consider these points while reading your book next week.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159508

    Stan Evil Side
    Member

    Praveen,
    What aggravated me is the sloppiness of the introduction and the arguments on the very first pages of your book.
    1. YOU ARE a highly visible representative of the Six Sigma community yet make causal inferences on a data set of 5 data entries on a topic that has been the centerpiece of research in economics since the heydays of the Chicago school. You represent a problem solving methodology that is supposed to be known for its stringency in its inference making. These pages just send the wrong message!
    2. The organization (government) that is known for its high levels of red tape and bureaucratic inefficiencies is taken as an exemplary case of what businesses are supposed to do. In additiion, the administration that you use for the support of your argument has neglected the economy with far wider reaching consequences than the people in your country even realize .
    I will not ignore your work as I will not ignore the efforts of anybody who ventures out and puts the enormous effort  into writing a book. But be aware that you may lose your audience before you are even beginning to develop your argument. Take this as somewhat “gutsy” feedback for future revisions of this book. An no, thanks, I get aggravated by many books. If I gave back every book that aggravates me I would have but a handful of books in my bookshelves.
    Finally, from an intellectual point of view, satisfaction is irrelevant. It is the ability of a book to entice critical thinking that is important. And that I think you have achieved. You have definitely moved me from a point of indifferent glossing over your work to someone who will review it in more detail. I published extensively on globalization and macroeconomics in the beginning of the 1990s and honestly just clinged when I saw what you wrote in the introductory chapter. No need to believe me. This is an anonymous site, and I will keep it that way. But thanks for your offer.

    0
    #159509

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    Hi Stan:
    I appreciate your feedback. I will think about incorporating your input in someway in my future work. Maybe, I should just skip the introductory chapter and get to the point.
    It is interesting to know that different people see different things in the book. For example, one executive loved just one bullet in the book, and purchased it for her organization.
    How could I review your early 90s work?
    Thanks for reading my work!
    Praveen

    0
    #159522

    Praveen Gupta
    Participant

    iSixSigma is offering eBook publishing services making it easy for everyone to publish ones work.

    0
    #159538

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
    Responding to your questions doesn’t interest me at all. I have read your posts and your are prancing around the site like the Jim Baker od Six Sigma passing judgement on everyone who posts that does not agree with you.
    If you take the content of your second paragraph is completely applicable to your post to Stan. So I suppose it makes you feel good to say ill thing abother you don’t even know.
    What a pathetic post. We are impressed with the love in your life, the thickness of your skin, your self proclaimed success, etc. Playing the part of the victim based on your untrue assumption that I am Stan makes you even more pathetic. I have never called you gay or anything else on your list and that poor me stuff is very reflective of what most of us know is not consistent with someone who is successful.
    The hipocrisy of your post run completely contrary to the image you are trying to create.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159539

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Stan’s Evil Side,
    The royalty thing is just as much nonsense as the rest of his post. These books are not pulling big royalties. Don’t confuse the novel guys with the technical side. This is not big money even if you are Michael George considering GG is the largest purchaser of his books.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159541

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Lebowski, I realize you are attempting to incite me in a negative way, but I will not fall prey to such tactics.  I am here to learn, answer questions, challenge thinking and share my experiences.  Engaging in your verbal battles with people is not my thing, so continue your mental hunt to find your next emotional meal.  Without doubt, deep inside you is a kind person that seemingly needs more attention and love than is currently in your life.  Regardless of the things you say, I will extend you the type of kindness and respect everyone deserves.
    God bless you and best of luck in all your endeavors.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159543

    Lebowski
    Participant

    Jim Ace,
    For a person who complained so loudly about people speaking about people they don’t know you now have another post where you do the same thing but excuse yourself by continuing to play the victim.
    As far as your continuing to show kindness and respect that everyone – that would include Stan – deserves? You blasted away at Stan this week and Carnell last week. You are talking the talk but you aren’t walking the walk and this little, meek, “poor me” victim isn’t working. A quote from J.Paul Getty – “the meek shall inherit the earth but not the mineral rights.”
    Luck has nothing to do with my endeavors.
    Lebowski

    0
    #159545

    MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER
    Participant

    Mike Carnell is Lebowski
     
    Lebowski is Mike Carnell
     
    …Hmmmm…
     
    Just my opinion.

    0
    #159546

    Mikel
    Member

    You are wrong, I’ve known Mike for a long time and he would use his name to say whatever he felt needed to be said.
    Lebowski is from a different generation than Mike.

    0
    #159549

    MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER
    Participant

    …or from a galaxy far, far away…

    0
    #159550

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Lebowski, in spite of your negative commentary and efforts to disparage me (and others), you should focus on kindness.  Remember that kindness will always bring you more fruits than vinegar.  I know that deep inside you is a really good, kind and wonderful person, but you have to work at this every day, in every way. 
     
    Through this practice, you will find more people are attracted to you and will listen better to what you say.  I’m sure you have a lot of knowledge and experience to share.  Do not waste your time and words to hurt others, focus them on the positive elements of what they have to say.
     
    If you or others belive that I “blasted away” at someone else, then I would aplogize for that.  As you probably noticed, there was someone running under the radar by posting their personal commentary using my screen name.  You will always find my posts (by the real Jim Ace) to be kind and as helpful as possible.  Again, I wish you the greatest happiness in all your efforts.
     
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159551

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Lebowski and Stan, I know how much you really want your inner-self to penetrate your “rough and tough” exterior.  This need is within all of us.  To be really effective at six sigma work, you must develop your interpersonal skills.  After our brief exchanges on this forum, let me provide some well proven tactics to help you.  
     
    These lessons are from Dale Carnegie’s book, from 1936, and have been nicely summarized at the following website: http://www.westegg.com/unmaintained/carnegie/win-friends.html.  
     
    I am posting this summary to help you and Stan become more effective with people because you got some really great knowledge and skills that other people need.  If you practice these points everyday, you will eventually lose your rough exterior and become more self-confident.  This will prove to be your “Law of Attraction.”  When this law of human dynamics is blended with your knowledge and skills, you will eventually become very good leaders and be better positioned to help others within the six sigma community.  We like you and need you, so please begin to practice these wonderful lessons from the great Dale Carnegie.
     
     
    Fundamental Techniques in Handling People
     
    ü       Don’t criticize, condemn or complain.
    ü       Give honest and sincere appreciation.
    ü       Arouse in the other person an eager want.
     
     
    Six ways to make people like you
     
    ü       Become genuinely interested in other people.
    ü       Smile.
    ü       Remember that a person’s name is to that person the sweetest and most important sound in any language.
    ü       Be a good listener.
    ü       Encourage others to talk about themselves.
    ü       Talk in terms of the other person’s interests.
    ü       Make the other person feel important – and do it sincerely.
     
     
    Win people to your way of thinking
     
    ü       The only way to get the best of an argument is to avoid it.
    ü       Show respect for the other person’s opinions. Never say, “You’re wrong.”
    ü       If you are wrong, admit it quickly and emphatically.
    ü       Begin in a friendly way.
    ü       Get the other person saying “yes, yes” immediately.
    ü       Let the other person do a great deal of the talking.
    ü       Let the other person feel that the idea is his or hers.
    ü       Try honestly to see things from the other person’s point of view.
    ü       Be sympathetic with the other person’s ideas and desires.
    ü       Appeal to the nobler motives.
    ü       Dramatize your ideas.
    ü       Throw down a challenge.
     
     
    Be a Leader: How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment
     
    ü       Begin with praise and honest appreciation.
    ü       Call attention to people’s mistakes indirectly.
    ü       Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person.
    ü       Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.
    ü       Let the other person save face.
    ü       Praise the slightest improvement and praise every improvement. Be “hearty in your approbation and lavish in your praise.”
    ü       Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to.
    ü       Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct.
    ü       Make the other person happy about doing the thing you suggest.
     
    We care about you.
     
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159552

    New Helpdesk Service
    Participant

    We are gald to announce that ISixSigma is now expanding its line of Helpdesk services. Please stay on the line until we can connect you to Six Sigma Certified Jim Ace to give you his personalized drugstore psychology advice.

    0
    #159554

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Now that was funny!  You see, the power of humor is far better than being unkind.  You are really much better in this mode.  Thank you for the laugh.  Practice some of the other points and you will start winning friends and influencing people.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159555

    New Helpdesk Service
    Participant

    Jim,
    Glad to see you laugh. Why don’t you just loosen up a little bit on this site. Your message would come much more effectively across if it wasn’t so tense and so “high school teacher” like. For example, “novices often forget …”, we’re all novices at some level! What is needed in Six Sigma is exchange of ideas, clarification, various points of view … not lectures. Some are more grumpy than others, so be it. Anyway, enjoy your week-end with your family. They’re more important than any of the stuff that’s being discussed on this site anyway.

    0
    #159556

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    New Helpdesk Service, I really liked your last post.  It was full of good advice and wisdom.  I think your right about the word “novice,” just never thought of it that way.  You are also right about us being students and teachers at the same time.  This ball is often passed around to all participants in a collaborative environment. 
    I also agree with you that some people are naturally grumpy, and thats OK, so long as grumpiness is mixed with kindness and respect.  Given that your advice and counseling is so good and “on the mark,” I would assume you will naturally want to share this valuable message with others that could benefit from loosening up and being less tense.  I look forward to reading your posts (like this one) to the other “tense” participants of this thread.  In this way I will gain even more understanding about your efforts to bring peace in an equal and unbiased way.
    I would also like to thank you for your tribute to our families as this is what is most important to us all.  I hope you and everyone else has a great weekend.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159566

    Mike Carnell
    Participant

    Mike Carnell is not Lebowski. I have posted here for over 5 years and always posted under my own name.
    As for the other MENSA candidate that decided Stan and Lebowski were the same person. There were serveral posts exchanged between Lebowski and Stan one day. If you use to names and answer your own posts the monitor and tell and will ban you from the site so it is pretty obvious Stan and Lebowski are different people as well.

    0
    #159569

    James F
    Participant

    “corporate Sigma level at 5.4”
    A totally meaningless statement and utter rubbish !!! 
    This idiot needs to go back to school and learn some statistics.

    0
    #159614

    GB
    Participant

    Nicely put, Lebowski.
     

    0
    #159615

    MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER
    Participant

    Ahhhhhhhh…Riiiiiigggggght….
     
    No, Stan is not Lebowski, you are.  Interesting pickup on the forum rules, since you mentioned it, have you and Lebowski ever had a conversation (on the forum) or would that be a violation of the rules? 
     
    That’s what I thought.
     
    Just my opinion.
     

    0
    #159618

    lin
    Participant

    If I have 10 million lines of software code, and each line of code needs to conform to 300 software itemized code standards, what are my opportunities for success?

    0
    #159620

    Brandon
    Participant

    Bill,
    Given that – you don’t have a chance!!

    0
    #159621

    GB
    Participant

    Ask Mike Cyger if I am using multiple screen names in violation of the TOS…go ahead!
    Stan is Stan, Leb is Leb and I am HBGB.   The site Admins are pretty good about monitoring IP Addresses and rooting out multiples.   It took some time to root out our friend, Marlon Brando, but it got done.

    0
    #159627

    Jim Ace
    Participant

    Come on ladies and gentlemen, let’s be nice and kind to each other.  Remember that you and many others come here with a screen name, so no one can get one up on the other except here in cyber space, and even then, only for a few brief moments, for as long as the post is showing. 
    After these few precious moments, the post just drifts away into deepest corners of the websites database, likely to never be seen again!  So what is to be gained by all the bickering and slams?  Use that time to say something that makes others feel good, and like Dale Carnegie suggests.  If you are really trying to create sentiment, then make some highly QUALITY sentiment.
    Here is a website and video that is absolutely incredible and offers a tremendous SECRET.  If you watch it, you’ll never look at the world in the same way, ever again!  At least watch the free trailer.  I have no connection to this site, but I do highly recommend this video for everyone and their families.  It has HUGE implications for six sigma!
    http://www.thesecret.tv/home.html
    God’s love to everyone and remember the Law of Attraction.
    Jim Ace

    0
    #159630

    Steven Bonacorsi
    Member

    Yes hacl,
    While you do need PhD statisticians in Pharma and Biotech, I have found in working most LSS projects in at least Pharma industry to not need such deep dives, even they have simple business processes that often do not require any stats in order to improve, just depends on the criticality of the process. But for the most part, I would say that the 80/20 rule applies in that 80% of the processes did not require too deep of statistical investigation in order to ID the root cause!
    Hope that helps,
    Steven Bonacorsi

    0
    #159639

    LMAO
    Participant

    “How could I review your early 90s work?”

    0
Viewing 90 posts - 1 through 90 (of 90 total)

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