Six Sigma Methodology - Essay Example

Six Sigma is a quality improvement process which starts with the voice of the and then with the help of data and statistics, the problems ofthe customer are resolved (Heuring, 2004). The Six Sigma was developed at Motorola in 1987 when they found some sub-standard product quality that could be traced to wrong decision made by engineers when designing component parts (Arnheiter & Maleyeff, 2005). As products became more complex, defects started increasing and the customers started demanding higher quality. When Motorola studied the component quality and the final product quality, they found that the processed tended to shift across lots. The task for the consultants is extremely challenging because the oppurtunities for defects (OFD) in the automobiles is extremely high. While the original aim of Six Sigma was focused on the manufacturing processes, today marketing, billing, purchasing and invoicing functions are also advised by consultants which help to constantly minimize errors and improve efficiency. Six Sigma methodology defines, measures, analyzes, improves and controls (DMAIC) the entire improvement process and there are teams formed to oversee the improvement process (Heuring, 2004). Sigma representing standard deviation has evolved from a measurement scale to a far reaching methodology to drive business improvement. The sigma level is the benchmark for the ability of a process to accomplish the demanded requirements (Pfeifer, Reissiger & Canales, 2004). There are so many oppurtunities to apply the Six Sigma that companies find it difficult to decide which project to tackle. Consultants do not find it easy to make Six Sigma work through an organization. If the employees are discontented, then success with Six Sigma cannot be achieved. Six Sigma strategy places emphasis on achieving quantifiable and measurable financial returns to the bottom line of an organization (Antony, 2004). It also clarifies that to be successful there has to be strong and passionate leadership. Six Sigma methodology integrates the human and the process elements of improvement. The human elements include the culture change, customer focus, belt system and infrastructure while the process includes process management, statistical analysis of data, and measurement system analysis. The tools and techniques for fixing the problems are utilized in a sequential and disciplined manner. The difference in the success and failure of the Six Sigma project depends on how, where, and when the tools are applied. Six Sigma creates an infrastructure of Master Black belts (MBBs), black belts (BBs), and green belts (GBs) that lead, deploy and implement the approach. This methodology forces people to measurements in place. Measurement must be considered as a part of the culture change. While consultants play a vital role in the identification of the problem, analysis and measurements, they can only advice. The actual process improvement and implementation lies with the company executives. It requires the involvement of the senior executives; there has to be a cultural change which is driven by company leadership. Six Sigma should not be considered a program that has to be implemented; it should become the way to work (Heuring, 2004). The consultants agree that it has to be high priority for the CEO of an organization. Consultants work with the customers to identify the problems and obstacles in achieving the business goals and help identify where the company will use Six Sigma to “move the needles” in that area. Consultants then train the workers including the executives. The ‘black belts’ or the high potential executives are identified and pulled out from their regular positions. They are assisted by ‘green belts’ (GBs) who have also been trained, to assist them in the completion of the projects. Consultants break down the pieces into manageable pieces and then improve each piece to affect the overall performance. At Ford, each car has approximately 20,000 OFDs and even if Ford were to attain Six Sigma quality, one in every 15 car produced would contain a defect (Arnheiter & Maleyeff, 2005). The consultants can take into considerations the various processes and components that make up the whole car and minimize the OFD. The goal at Six Sigma is to minimize the number of defects to as low as 3.4 parts per million opportunities (Henderson & Evans, 2000). This translates into 99.99966 percent accuracy, which is as close as anyone is likely to get perfect. Even 99 percent quality level is not acceptable because at airports it would mean two unsafe landings per day; in power generation it would result in 7 hours of no electricity per month; in medical surgery it would mean 500 incorrect surgeries per week; and in credit card it could mean 80 million incorrect transactions each year (Raisinghani et al. 2005). They use the normal distribution and strong relationships between product nonconformities, or defects, and product yield, reliability, cycle time, inventory, schedule (Henderson & Evans, 2000). The key components of successful Six Sigma implementation include upper management support, organizational infrastructure, training, application of statistical tools, and link to human resource-based action. However there are certain limits that consultants face. To provide the most effective solution, obtaining the right data is challenging and this challenge is pronounced as in certain processes there is no data to begin with (Antony, 2004). Sometimes the solutions driven by the data can be expensive and this can cause frustration. As a result only a small part of the solution can be implemented which naturally does not give the desired results. The prioritization and the right election is a critical success factor in Six Sigma program prioritization is still based on pure subjective judgment. Insufficient tools are available for prioritizing projects. While the statistical definition for manufacturing process is available, in the service process anything that does not meet the customer needs is said to be a failure. The sigma capability level in the service process could differ from a hospital to a hotel. Another drawback in the Six Sigma program is that the certification of the black belts and the green belts is non-standardized. The skills and expertise developed by black belts is inconsistent across companies and to a large extent they are dependent on the certifying body. The start-up cost for institutionalizing the Six Sigma process can be costly. The advantages of Six Sigma programs can be diluted if the focus is on the number of black belts and the green belts or the number of projects completed instead of bottom-line savings. Too many consultants have come into the business of selling Six Sigma expertise when they barely understand the tools and techniques of the Six Sigma roadmap. Besides, consultants cannot effectively use Six Sigma in sectors like computer and technology where innovation and speed are more important than quality (Henderson & Evans, 2000). According to (Goldstein, 2001), consultants to LG Electronics, there can be no short-cuts when applying Six Sigma. If short-cuts worked, Six Sigma was not required. LG electronics’ appliance business achieved 50% reduction in defects within 5 years from 1995. Consultants are not keen to work with businesses that are intent on finding short-cuts. Customers or business do not understand the technicalities involved in the Six Sigma program which results in failure. For instance, they do not understand what is meant by the ‘deployment plan’. The foundation of every program has to be built as per the needs and requirements of the organization as has been in the case of GE which as the best designed foundation. The deployment at GE is thorough and the program is implemented from the top of the organization on down. All the success factors were employed; restructuring and training were in place and the leadership was committed and supportive. To achieve success of the Six Sigma program, the entire employee population should receive effective communication (Goldstein, 2001). This implies that each employee should be aware of what the program is, what the objectives are, how it will work, and how each employee can participate and contribute. The senior executives need to be trained so that they can intelligently take part in the project reviews. They must also regularly attend scheduled project reviews. The consultants insist that the success of the program relies on how senior managers are involved at the start of each new wave of training to address the class participants. To enthuse, encourage and communicate to the participants, none other than managers would suffice. The processes should be reviewed regularly so that constant pressure can be exerted on the black belts (BBs) and the green belts (GBs) to drive their projects to successful closure. It helps to monitor whether the BBs and the GBs are following the strategy and the methodology. Hence project review is an essential part of the program. Most companies do not understand the importance of Master Black Belts (MBBs) which is essential for technical support. Many projects fail because the front line people do not fully understand the technical issues. This enhances the importance of the MBBs. The MBBs and the BBs too have to meet on a regular basis to exchange notes on the progress of the project. According to the consultants, Six Sigma is not a magic bullet that can solve the problems by entering some data into a few blank fields with prompts from a software program. People should have right analytical skills and should want to be a part of the effort. When Six Sigma was initially rolled out at GE, the employees were uneasy at the thought of having to learn statistics (Antony & Banuelas, 2002). Such misconceptions should not be allowed to develop as the entire process and the training becomes redundant. At times people just want to meet targets of training a certain number of people within a defined period of time and they do meet such targets. Consultants contend that meeting target should not be the objective. It has to be the right people that need to be trained and not just numbers to achieve targets. It is very important that the BBs have the ability to apply the learnings which can be assessed during the project reviews. Besides, project selection seems to be the biggest hurdle. Diolia (2007) contends that in the control phase the most important step is the documentation of and training to the new process. All personnel must be familiar with the new changes and why they are being made. Then come the closure of the project through the project charter. An analysis of the gains and successes during the project, and the lessons learned from the project has to be made. This has to be presented to the management for consideration and approval. Six Sigma pays off by cutting costs, reducing mistakes, boosting worker morale, and bolstering the companies’ profits (Chowdhury, 2003). Consultants can help the companies to go the next level of efficiency - Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) which helps to redesign the processes so fewer errors come up. Instantly constantly debugging the products and processes, DFSS attempts to start from scratch in designing the processes such that errors never occur. Thus, from the consultants’ point of view the success of Six Sigma depends on several factors that include the involvement of the top executives, proper communication of the purpose of the change or the new process, the expected results and regular review of the project. Effective training and the ability of the personnel to apply the techniques and tools is also essential. Just applying Six Sigma without effective monitoring would render it a waste of time and money. Consultants help to make the companies conscious of these efforts. References: Antony, J 2004, Some pros and cons of six sigma: an academic perspective, The TQM Magazine, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 303-306. Antony, J & Banuelas, R 2002, Key ingredients for the effective implementation of Six Sigma Program, Measuring Business Excellence, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 20-27 Arnheiter, E D & Maleyeff, J 2005, The integration of lean management and Six Sigma, The TQM Magazine, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 5-18. Chowdhury, S 2003, Design for Six Sigma, Reviewed online 27 October 2008, Diloia, S 2007, Understanding the Phases of Six Sigma, Reviewed online 27 October 2008, Goldstein, M 2001, Six Sigma Program Success Factors, Reviewed online 27 October 2008, Henderson, K M & Evans, J R 2000, Successful implementation of Six Sigma: benchmarking General Electric Company, Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 260-281. Heuring, L 2004. Six Sigma in Sight, Reviewed online 27 October 2008, Pfeifer, T Reissiger, W & Canales, C 2004, Integrating six sigma with quality management systems, The TQM Magazine, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 241-24 Raisinghani, M S et al 2005, Six Sigma: concepts, tools, and applications, Industrial Management & Data Systems, vol. 105, no. 4, pp. 491-505. Read More