Skip to main content

Common Misperceptions about Six Sigma

Common Misperceptions about Six Sigma

The New Six Sigma Approach

Six Sigma only applies in a manufacturing environment.

Six Sigma provides tools that enable teams to improve any type of process, both continuous and transactional.

Six Sigma is too complicated and requires a Ph.D. in Statistics.

Breakthroughs in desktop software and improved courseware enable teams to complete complex analysis and experiments quickly and easily.

Six Sigma projects can go on for months with no clear gains assured.

Clear project charters, upfront financial benefits analysis, and executive accountability ensure timely completion of projects as well as significant financial returns on every project.

Six Sigma projects add to employee overload.

Project prioritization and continuous management review ensure the optimization of team resources.

Six Sigma primarily focuses on cost reduction.

While cost reduction is usually an important outcome, all projects first focus on meeting critical customer requirements.

Six Sigma programs create more "initiative of the month" confusion.

Six Sigma can be the integrating force that brings current initiatives into alignment and focuses all initiatives on breakthrough business improvement.

Six Sigma is just another name for TQM.

While Six Sigma utilizes many TQM tools, these tools are applied for breakthrough business improvement and sustainable financial returns.

Six Sigma requires heavy investment, with no clear line of sight to return on investment.

Investments in Six Sigma projects are accretive—all projects are selected based on their ability to achieve clear return-on-investment goals

Comments

Unknown said…
Nice information on ROWE, I had been looking for this for a while now and how it effected lean six sigma, very well written, much appreciated.
I am working on a project these days and am in need of as much help as I can find, this helped!
June 26, 2012 at 3:05 PM
Unknown said…

community members who go through the auditing process–which can be anxiety inducing–but you make a great point about how strong systems and dedication to continuous improvement are what management systems are all about. Thanks for sharing.lean six sigma
August 17, 2012 at 12:36 AM
Post a Comment

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
15 comments
Read more

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
13 comments
Read more

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
2 comments
Read more