Skip to main content

About Six Sigma

Six Sigma is a set of practices originally developed by Motorola to systematically improve processes by eliminating defects.[1] A defect is defined as nonconformity of a product or service to its specifications.

While the particulars of the methodology were originally formulated by Bill Smith at Motorola in 1986[2], Six Sigma was heavily inspired by six preceding decades of quality improvement methodologies such as quality control, TQM, and Zero Defects. Like its predecessors, Six Sigma asserts the following:

  • Continuous efforts to reduce variation in process outputs is key to business success
  • Manufacturing and business processes can be measured, analyzed, improved and controlled
  • Succeeding at achieving sustained quality improvement requires commitment from the entire organization, particularly from top-level management

The term "Six Sigma" refers to the ability of highly capable processes to produce output within specification. In particular, processes that operate with six sigma quality produce at defect levels below 3.4 defects per (one) million opportunities (DPMO)[3]. Six Sigma's implicit goal is to improve all processes to that level of quality or better.

Six Sigma is a registered service mark and trademark of Motorola, Inc.[4] Motorola has reported over US$17 billion in savings[5] from Six Sigma as of 2006.

In addition to Motorola, companies that also adopted Six Sigma methodologies early-on and continue to practice it today include Bank of America, Caterpillar, Honeywell InternationalAllied Signal), Raytheon, Merrill Lynch, 3M and General ElectricJack Welch). (previously known as (introduced by

Ref: Wikipedia.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

10 Ways to Failure for a New Six Sigma Deployment

10 Ways to Failure for a New Six Sigma Deployment The returns from a well-deployed Six Sigma initiative can be richly rewarding. The results of many business organizations stand in testimony to that. But the opposite also is true. Ten major points are critical to the success or failure of a Six Sigma deployment. Here the points are outlined as the 10 ways that a Six Sigma initiative can fail: 1- Lack of Commitment from the Top 2- Part-time Black Belts 3- Projects Not Linked to Organizational Objectives 4- Focusing on Quantity Instead of Quality 5- No Review Mechanism 6- No Visible Reward and Recognition Mechanism 7- No Infrastructural Support to Teams Working on Projects 8- Copy-and-Paste Deployment 9- Too Much Insistence on Statistics and Tools 10- Expecting Too Much and Too Soon - Ref: www.isixsigma.com

Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) and Crystal Ball Case Study

Background In this case study, we are a compressor manufacturer in the process of developing a new type of compressor. Our project team was charged with developing the design for the compressor using Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) tools and techniques. As we worked through the DMA DV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, Verify) process, we used simulation and optimization to provide project justification, lend insight into the critical drivers of quality, and help create a cost effective design th at meets customer requirements. For DFSS, critical benefits of simulation and optimization are the ability to prototype new products or processes without an appreciable investment of time or money, minimal defects, and sales driven through improved customer satisfaction. Define The first step in our Six Sigma process was to estimate the financial impact of this project. We started by developing a simple spreadsheet model (DFSS Case Study Defin e.xls) in Microsoft ® Excel to take into

History of QFD

QFD was created by Mitsubishi Heavy Industry at Kobe Shipyards in the early 1970s. Stringent government regulations for military vessels coupled with the large capital outlay per ship forced Kobe Shipyard’s management to commit to upstream quality assurance. The Kobe engineers drafted a matrix which relates all the government regulations, critical design requirements, and customer requirements to company technical controlled characteristics of how the company would achieve them. In addition, the matrix also depicted the relative importance of each entry, making it possible for important items to be identified and prioritized to receive a greater share of the available company resources. Winning is contagious. Other companies adopted QFD in the mid-1970s. For example, the automotive industry applied the first QFD to the rust problem. Since then, QFD usage has grown as a wellrooted methodology into many American businesses. It has become so familiar because of its adopted commandm