Quality: Six Sigma - Coursework Example

Six sigma By Six sigma is a technique that is used in organizations as a tool to improve the capability of the processes that are performed in a business. In the evaluation of the factors that are involved in a business, the increase or decrease in variation that occurs in the processes of a business leads to defect reduction and increase in profits, improvement in the quality of products and services that are produced and improve the morale of those that work in an organization. The methodology involves the identification of underlying approaches. The approach that is recognized is referred to as DMAIC which means to define measure, analyze, improve and control. The approach defines the steps that are needed and are to be followed in the implementation of activities (Desai, 2010). The approach will need starting with identification of the strengths and weaknesses and ending it with the implementation of solutions that are long lasting. The method is the one that is mostly used, adopted and recognized Relationship between lean stigma and six sigma Lean-six-sigma is data that is driven with the philosophy of making improvements that defects values of prevention on defects that are detected. The approach brings consumer satisfaction to the bottom line results by bringing down the variations, cycle times and wastage and at the same time, they aim in promoting the use of standardization of work which in turn creates competitive advantage to the business. The approach applies in every place in the organization where wastes exist and every employee is to be aware of the outcomes that are involved. There are several factors that differs lean and six stigma (Desai, 2010). In lean approach, there is driving out of wastes in implementations and it aims in promotion of work flow and standardization. In six stigma, the focus is mainly on reducing processes variation and enhancement of process control. Lean and six sigma have the general purpose of providing best quality for consumers. DMAIC in the process is the strategy that is used in the improvement of quality. This is the integrated part of six sigma used in the initiative. The method is carried out in five phases. Defining the problem is the first step in the process. Defining the problem that is entailed in the process involves the opportunity for improvement and the focus is on the goals and requirements that are needed by the consumers. Measure is used in evaluating the performance of the process. Analysis in the process determines the main cause of variations and the defects that come about in the process. Improvement in the process tends to eliminate the defects that are able to come up in the process with consideration of root cause of the problems (Desai, 2010). Control tends to improve the process and processes that occur in the future with consideration of the performance. After all the factors are considered in the organization, there is need of redesigning the sectors of the organization to enable the coming up with desired goals. Implementing six sigma Implementation of six sigma involves processes and it varies among organization with consideration of the structure and culture of the organization. There are mainly two options that are involved in implementing the initiative. The first option that is available to organizations is implementing the program or initiative. The next available option is creating a six sigma structure. In the approach of six sigma program or initiative, there is teaching on the statistical tools after some period of time and they seek consultation when there is need for help. The implementation adds to lack of infrastructure fashion. The second option in implementation that needs creation of six sigma infrastructure is done in a method that creates an approach that is oriented in the processes. It teaches those that practices it the processes that will be involved in identification of the right tools to be used (Desai, 2010). Benefits of six sigma The main advantage of the process is that it enables the coming about of large impacts through projects that are always linked to bottom line results obtained from them. The link is important in projects as it makes the implementation to focus mainly on the goals that are to be achieved and minimizes deviations from the goals. The approach in implementation makes use of tools in a more focused way leading to more production in the projects. Businesses that deploys six sigma are much disadvantageous at it provides a strategy or process that is needed for management that can be studied and can be improved. The approach increases communication. Information that is increased is those that occur between management in an organization and practitioners as they find themselves at the same place when they present the projects. The communication that occurs in the organization enables the detailed understanding of vital issues that occur in the process of implementation of business strategies. In the approach the employees and management are given a view on how statistical tools can be important value in the organization. Black belts that are in the organization are also able to receive feedback on the projects that they implemented during training (Desai, 2010). The approach implements six sigma with the aim of creating more time in the organization. This is more necessary for auditing and incorporation of lessons that are learned from the general view of the business strategy. Weaknesses of six sigma In implementation of this approach there is requirement in total participation in everyone in an organization. When this is considered in implementation, there always occurs difficulty. The definitions in the implementation are fixed as it requires cooperation from everyone in the organization which is not easily achieved. When the cooperation cannot be obtained from all the people there is likely to be failure in the implementation. In large companies, making all the workers on the same track is a difficult process. Complication is also a factor that is experienced in implementation of six sigma. What brings success in the implementation of the approach is what also causes weakness in the same approach. The model aims and requires important amount of acquiring and analysis of data. The process that is used in obtaining the data is what complicates the process (Desai, 2010). It makes the process to be complicated and consume much time. Small companies may see the process that is involved to require more time and this can make them to give up on the approach. Benefit of lean sigma The main benefit that is gained from the approach is that it facilitates the improvement of manufacturing and production services in an organization. This increases effectiveness of a business as there will be increased satisfaction of consumers. The approach is also important in making sure that all aspects that are needed in implementation are not deviated from during the processes. Weakness of lean sigma Low level of quality management adoption that is associated with this approach has a negative impact on the success that is obtained from the use of Lean Six Sigma. The implication of the approach to managers makes it not convenient to them due to several factors. First, the managers are expected to understand the possibility and restrictions of quality approaches that are involved. The managers also before any LSS program are expected in the companies to apply quality assessment in order to be prepared to device Lean, Six Sigma or both. The value of this essay is in providing an explanation about the success and fail of companies in its way to LSS. Question 2 Contributing factors to the accident The flowing was not scheduled and the crew that had operated it during the flight had no enough experience. The plane was flown by the copilot instead of a pilot himself. The deviations of the aircrafts and the services that were not offered to the plane were also not recorded. This made no surety in parts or sectors of the plane that could lead to the accident. When the pilots were in the flight they identified audio problems but neglected the effects making them to disappear before the corrective measures could be implemented on them. The negligence was a major cause in the occurrence of the accident. The commander discussed with the copilot his intention to monitor the wind during the approach and to land if the cross wind component was within the operating companys limit of 34 knots which was also the maximum demonstrated by the manufacturer for the type. The landing with the maximum Knots that was described by the manufacturer risked the lives of those that were on board as the plane was much exposed to failure in the systems. They discussed the alternative options of going around and holding for up to 33 minutes or diverting to Liverpool if the cross wind was too strong. The discussions were valid but there were some considerations that were not taken into consideration due to negligence. The commander considered, but did not discuss with the copilot, his intention to approach at VAT (target threshold speed) plus 20 knots reducing to VAT plus 10 knots over the threshold. The reductions were much essential for the copilot during landing but he was not informed on that during discussion. . In the final stage of the approach the commander converted from the wings level angled off approach flown by the autopilot to a wing down with top rudder technique which essentially aligned the fuselage with the runway. There was notice of increase in tabulation by the members of the crew but the controller on the ground could not read the measurements. Instead of him engaging in finding on what was wrong with the readings, he goes ahead to asking the copilot who was in the plane. The reading in the plane and that at the ground was not similar. The cause of the accident at this point was due to poor coordination and communication between the controller on the ground and the pilots in the plane. The commander initiated the flare at what seemed to him to be a slightly greater than normal height although the copilot thought the flare was normal. The copilot was aware that the plane bounced back in the air but failed to notice the commander. The commander perceived only that the aircraft had eased on the main landing gear. He attempted to prevent the aircraft becoming airborne again by applying nose down elevator but it bounced a second time. When both pilots thought that the aircraft was on the ground, the commander handed over control of the ailerons and elevators to the copilot whilst he handled the power levers and nose wheel steering. On the third touchdown both pilots believed that the aircraft had settled on to all three wheels sets before they saw the nose rising rapidly. . Both pilots applied full right rudder to correct a swing to the left and at the same time the commander applied the wheel brakes. The application should have not been done at the same time when there was coordination. The application at the same time largely contributed to occurrence of the accident. Why-because diagram The fire section responded to the accident because they thought there was danger and probability of fire. The commander instructed the copilot to shut down both engines because there was continuous bumping of the plane that could lead to the risk of fire. The plane descended rapidly because both the pilots applied full right rudder to correct a swing to the left and at the same time the commander applied the wheel brakes. The copilot was instructed to keep the noise down by the commander because he became concerned at the possibility of becoming airborne again with decaying airspeed and the end of the runway fast approaching. The commander initiated the flare at what seemed to him to be a slightly greater than normal height because the CWP audio caution warning sounded but neither pilot looked to see which caption had triggered the warning. Reference Desai, D. (2010). Six sigma. Mumbai [India]: Himalaya Pub. House. Read More