Six Sigma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Not to be confused with Sigma 6.
This article or section is not written in the formal tone expected of an
encyclopedia article.
Please improve it or discuss changes on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to
writing better articles for suggestions.

A Wikipedian has expressed the opinion that this article is unbalanced.

Please help improve the article by adding information and sources on neglected
viewpoints.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.

The often used six sigma symbol

Six Sigma is a methodology to manage process variations that cause defects and to
systematically work towards managing variation to eliminate those defects[1].
Defects are defined as unacceptable deviation from the mean or target. The
objective of Six Sigma is to deliver high performance, reliability, and value to
the end customer. The process was pioneered by Bill Smith at Motorola in 1986[2]
and was originally defined[3] as a metric for measuring defects and improving
quality, and a methodology to reduce defect levels below 3.4 Defects Per (one)
Million Opportunities (DPMO), or put another way, a methodology of controlling a
process to the point of ± six sigma (standard deviations) from a centerline. Six
Sigma has now grown beyond defect control.
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 to date.
In addition to Motorola, companies which also adopted six sigma methodologies
early-on and continue to practice it today, are Honeywell International
(previously know as Allied Signal) and General Electric (introduced by Jack
Welch). The two companies have reported to have saved literally billions of
dollars thanks to the aggressive implementation and daily practice of six sigma
methodologies.
Recent six sigma trends lies in the advancement of the technology with integrating
to TRIZ for inventive problem solving and product design [6].

Contents
[hide]
• 1 Methodology
o 1.1 DMAIC
o 1.2 DMADV
• 2 Roles required for implementation
• 3 Examples of some key tools used
• 4 Software used for Six Sigma
o 4.1 Origin
o 4.2 The term Six Sigma
4.2.1 The +/-1.5 Sigma Drift
4.2.1.1 Digital Six Sigma
4.2.2 Statistics and robustness
• 5 References
• 6 See also
• 7 External links

[edit] Methodology
Six Sigma has two key methodologies[7]: DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve,
Control) and DMADV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, Verify). DMAIC is used to
improve an existing business process. DMADV is used to create new product designs
or process designs in such a way that it results in a more predictable, mature and
defect free performance. Sometimes a DMAIC project may turn into a DFSS project
because the process in question requires complete redesign to bring about the
desired degree of improvement.
[edit] DMAIC
Basic methodology consists of the following five phases:
• Define formally define the process improvement goals that are consistent
with customer demands and enterprise strategy.
• Measure to define baseline measurements on current process for future
comparison. Map and measure the process in question and collect required process
data.
• Analyze to verify relationship and causality of factors. What is the
relationship? Are there other factors that have not been considered?
• Improve optimize the process based upon the analysis using techniques like
Design of Experiments.
• Control setup pilot runs to establish process capability, transition to
production and thereafter continuously measure the process and institute control
mechanisms to ensure that variances are corrected before they result in defects.
[edit] DMADV
Basic methodology consists of the following five phases:
• Define formally define the goals of the design activity that are consistent
with customer demands and enterprise strategy.
• Measure identify CTQs (critical to qualities), product capabilities,
production process capability, risk assessment, etc.
• Analyze develop and design alternatives, create high-level design and
evaluate design capability to select the best design.
• Design develop detail design, optimize design, and plan for design
verification. This phase may require simulations.
• Verify design, setup pilot runs, implement production process and handover
to process owners.
Also see Design for Six Sigma quality. The most common acronym for Design for Six
Sigma is DFSS.
Some people have used DMAICR (realize). Others contend that focusing on the
financial gains realized through Six Sigma is counter-productive and that said
financial gains are simply byproducts of a good process improvement.
Another additional flavor of Design for Six Sigma is the DMEDI method. This
process is almost exactly like the DMADV process, utilizing the same toolkit, but
with a different acronym. DMEDI stands for:
• Define
• Measure
• Explore
• Develop
• Implement
[edit] Roles required for implementation
Six Sigma identifies five key roles[8] for its successful implementation.
• Executive Leadership includes CEO and other key top management team members.
They are responsible for setting up a vision for Six Sigma implementation. They
also empower the other role holders with the freedom and resources to explore new
ideas for breakthrough improvements.
• Champions are responsible for the Six Sigma implementation across the
organization in an integrated manner. The Executive Leadership draws them from the
upper management. Champions also act as mentor to Black Belts. At GE this level of
certification is now called "Quality Leader".
• Master Black Belts, identified by champions, act as in-house expert coach
for the organization on Six Sigma. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma.
They assist champions and guide Black Belts and Green Belts. Apart from the usual
rigor of statistics, their time is spent on ensuring integrated deployment of Six
Sigma across various functions and departments.
• Experts This level of skill is used primarily within Aerospace and Defense
Business Sectors. Experts work across company boundaries, improving services,
processes, and products for their suppliers, their entire campuses, and for their
customers. Raytheon Incorporated was one of the first companies to introduce
Experts to their organizations. In Raytheon, Experts work not only across multiple
sites, but across business divisions, incorporating lessons learned throughout the
company.
• Black Belts operate under Master Black Belts to apply Six Sigma methodology
to specific projects. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma. They primarily
focus on Six Sigma project execution, whereas Champions and Master Black Belts
focus on identifying projects/functions for Six Sigma.
• Green Belts are the employees who take up Six Sigma implementation along
with their other job responsibilities. They operate under the guidance of Black
Belts and support them in achieving the overall results.
Please note that in many successful modern programs, Green Belts and Black Belts
are empowered to initiate, expand, and lead projects in their area of
responsibility. The roles as defined above, therefore, conform to the antiquated
Mikel Harry/Richard Schroeder model, which is far from being universally accepted.
The terms black belt and green belt are borrowed from the ranking systems in
various martial arts.
Specific training programs are available to train people to take up these roles.
[edit] Examples of some key tools used
• 5 Whys
• ANOVA
• ANOVA Gage R&R
• Axiomatic design
• Catapult Exercise on variability
• Cause & Effects Diagram (a.k.a. Fishbone or Ishikawa Diagram)
• Chi-Square Test of Independence and Fits
• Control Charts
• Correlation
• Cost Benefit Analysis
• CTQ Tree
• Customer Output Process Input Supplier Maps
• Customer survey
• Design of Experiments
• Failure Modes Effects Analysis
• General Linear Model
• Histograms
• Homogeneity of Variance
• Process Maps
• Regression
• Run Charts
• Stratification
• Taguchi
• Thought Process Map

[edit] Software used for Six Sigma

There are generally two classes of software used to support Six Sigma: analysis
tools, which are used to perform statistical or process analysis, and program
management tools, used to manage and track a corporation's entire Six Sigma
program. Analysis tools include statistical software such as Minitab, JMP, SigmaXL
or Statgraphics as well as process analysis tools such as iGrafx. In addition some
alternatives are Microsoft Visio, Telelogic System Architect, IBM WebSphere
Business Modeler, and Proforma Corp. ProVision. For program management, tracking
and reporting, the popular tools include PowerSteering, iNexus and SixNet.
[edit] Origin
Robert Galvin did not really "invent" Six Sigma in the 1980s, but would more
correctly be said to have applied methodologies that had been available since the
1920s and were developed by luminaries like Shewhart, Deming, Juran, Ishikawa,
Ohno, Shingo, Taguchi and Shainin. All tools used by and for Six Sigma are
actually a subset of the Quality Engineering discipline and can be considered to
be a part of the ASQ Certified Quality Engineer body of knowledge. The goal of Six
Sigma, then, is to use the old tools in concert, for a greater effect than a sum-
of-parts approach.
The use of "Black Belts" as itinerant change agents is controversial as it has
created a cottage industry of training and certification which arguably relieves
management of accountability for change; pre-Six Sigma implementations,
exemplified by the Toyota Production System and Japan's industrial ascension,
simply used the technical talent at hand — Design, Manufacturing and Quality
Engineers, Toolmakers, Maintenance and Production workers — to optimize the
processes.
The expansion of the various "Belts" to include "Green Belt", "Master Black Belt"
and "Gold Belt" is commonly seen as a parallel to the various "Belt Factories"
that exist in martial arts. Additionally, there is criticism from the martial arts
community for the appropriation of the term "Black Belt" for a non martial arts
use. This was used as a joke in the comic strip Dilbert.
[edit] The term Six Sigma
Sigma (the lower-case Greek letter σ) is used to represent standard deviation (a
measure of variation) of a population (lower-case 's', is an estimate, based on a
sample). The term "six sigma process" comes from the notion that if you have six
standard deviations between the mean of a process and the nearest specification
limit, you will make practically no items that exceed the specifications. This is
the basis of the Process Capability Study, often used by quality professionals.
The term "Six Sigma" has its roots in this tool, rather than in simple process
standard deviation, which is also measured in "sigmas". Criticism of the tool
itself, and the way that the term was derived from the tool, often spark criticism
of Six Sigma.
The widely accepted definition of a six sigma process is one that produces 3.4
defective parts per million opportunities (DPMO).[1] A process that is normally
distributed will have 3.4 parts per million beyond a point that is 4.5 standard
deviations above or below the mean (one-sided Capability Study). This implies that
3.4 DPMO corresponds to 4.5 sigmas, not six as the process name would imply. This
can be confirmed by running on Six Sigma or Minitab a Capability Study on data
with a mean of 0, a standard deviation of 1, and an upper specification limit of
4.5. The 1.5 sigmas added to the name Six Sigma are arbitrary and they are called
"1.5 sigma shift" (SBTI Black Belt material, ca 1998). Dr. Donald Wheeler, one of
the most respected authors on the topics of Control Charts, Capability Studies,
and Designed Experiments, dismisses the 1.5 sigma shift as "goofy".[9]
In a Capability Study, sigma refers to the number of standard deviations between
the process mean and the nearest specification limit, rather than the standard
deviation of the process, which is also measured in "sigmas". As process standard
deviation goes up, or the mean of the process moves away from the center of the
tolerance, the Process Capability sigma number goes down, because fewer standard
deviations will then fit between the mean and the nearest specification limit (see
Cpk Index). The notion that, in the long term, processes usually do not perform as
well as they do in the short term is correct. That requires that that Process
Capability sigma based on long term data is less than or equal to an estimate
based on short term sigma. However, the original use of the 1.5 sigma shift is as
shown above, and implicitly assumes the opposite.
As sample size increases, the error in the estimate of standard deviation
converges much more slowly than the estimate of the mean (see confidence
interval). Even with a few dozen samples, the estimate of standard deviation often
drags an alarming amount of uncertainty into the Capability Study calculations. It
follows that estimates of defect rates can be very greatly influenced by
uncertainty in the estimate of standard deviation, and that the defective parts
per million estimates produced by Capability Studies often ought not to be taken
too literally.
Estimates for the number of defective parts per million produced also depends on
knowing something about the shape of the distribution from which the samples are
drawn. Unfortunately, we have no means for proving that data belong to any
particular distribution. We only assume normality, based on finding no evidence to
the contrary. Estimating defective parts per million down into the 100s or 10s of
units based on such an assumption is wishful thinking, since actual defects are
often deviations from normality, which have been assumed not to exist.

[edit] The +/-1.5 Sigma Drift

Everyone with a Six Sigma program knows about the +/-1.5 sigma drift of a process
mean, experienced by all processes. What this is saying is that if we are
manufacturing a product that is 100 +/- 3 cm (97–103cm), over time, it may drift
up to 98.5–104.5 or down to 95.5–101.5. That might be of concern to our customers.
So where does the "+/-1.5" come from?
The +/-1.5 shift was introduced by Mikel Harry. Where did he get it? Harry refers
to a paper written in 1975 by Evans, "Statistical Tolerancing: The State of the
Art. Part 3. Shifts and Drifts". The paper is about tolerancing. That is how the
overall error in an assembly is effected by the errors in components. Evans refers
to a paper by Bender in 1962, "Benderizing Tolerances – A Simple Practical
Probability Method for Handling Tolerances for Limit Stack Ups". He looked at the
classical situation with a stack of disks and how the overall error in the size of
the stack, relates to errors in the individual disks. Based on "probability,
approximations and experience", he suggests:
v = 1.5 SQRT (var X)
What has this got to do with monitoring the myriad processes that people are
concerned about? Very little. Harry then takes things a step further. Imagine a
process where 5 samples are taken every half hour and plotted on a control chart.
Harry considered the "instantaneous" initial 5 samples as being "short term"
(Harry's n=5) and the samples throughout the day as being "long term" (Harry's
g=50 points). Because of random variation in the first 5 points, the mean of the
initial sample is different to the overall mean. Harry derived a relationship
between the short term and long term capability, using the equation above, to
produce a capability shift or "Z shift" of 1.5! Over time, the original meaning of
"short term" and "long term" has been changed to result in "long term" drifting
means.
Harry has clung tenaciously to the "1.5" but over the years, its derivation has
been modified. In a recent note from Harry "We employed the value of 1.5 since no
other empirical information was available at the time of reporting." In other
words, 1.5 has now become an empirical rather than theoretical value. A further
softening from Harry: "... the 1.5 constant would not be needed as an
approximation".
Despite this, industry has fixed on the idea that it is impossible to keep
processes on target. No matter what is done, process means will drift by +/-1.5
sigma. In other words, suppose a process has a target value of 10.0, and control
limits work out to be, say, 13.0 and 7.0. "Long term" the mean will drift to 11.5
(or 8.5), with control limits changing to 14.5 and 8.5.
The simple truth is that any process where the mean changes by 1.5 sigma or any
other amount, is not in statistical control. Such a change can often be detected
by a trend on a control chart. A process that is not in control is not
predictable. It may begin to produce defects, no matter where specification limits
have been set.
World Class Quality means "on target with minimum variation".
In summary, the term "Six Sigma" has its roots in a quality tool that can easily
be misapplied by a naïve user and in the controversial 1.5 sigma shift.
[edit] Digital Six Sigma
In an effort to permanently minimize variation, Motorola has evolved the Six Sigma
methodology to use information systems tools to make business improvements
absolutely permanent. Motorola calls this effort Digital Six Sigma.
[edit] Statistics and robustness
Many mistakenly believe that the core of the Six Sigma methodology is statistics.
This is not so. You can do a very acceptable Six Sigma project with only the most
rudimentary statistical tools.
The core of the Six Sigma methodology is a data-driven, systematic approach to
problem solving, and focus on customer impact. Statistical tools just happen to be
useful along the way.
Six Sigma is not the answer to all problems. If you're writing poetry, it will
probably be of little value. If you're working on business, engineering, or
production processes it is practically always applicable and successful, when
applied correctly. In this sense, the core methodology is remarkably general and
robust.
Some professional statisticians justifiably criticize Six Sigma because the
quality of statistical understanding that is propagated by practitioners is highly
variable. Some programs are excellent, and some are much less so.
[edit] References
1. ^ Motorola University - What is Six Sigma?. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2006.
2. ^ The Inventors of Six Sigma. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2006.
3. ^ Motorola University Six Sigma Dictionary. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2006.
4. ^ Motorola Inc. - Motorola University. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2006.
5. ^ About Motorola University. Retrieved on Jan 29, 2006.
6. ^ Averboukh, Elena A.. Six Sigma Trends: Six Sigma Leadership And Innovation
Using TRIZ. Retrieved on Nov 13, 2006.
7. ^ Joseph A. De Feo & William W Barnard. JURAN Institute's Six Sigma
Breakthrough and Beyond - Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods, Tata McGraw-
Hill Publishing Company Limited, 2005. ISBN 0-07-059881-9
8. ^ Mikel Harry & Richard Schroeder. Six Sigma, Random House, Inc, 2000. ISBN
0-385-49437-8
9. ^ Wheeler, Donald J., Phd, The Six Sigma Practitioner's Guide to Data
Analysis, p307, www.spcpress.com
[edit] See also
• Design for Six Sigma
• Process Improvement
• Business Process
• Business Process Improvement
• Business Process Improvement Pattern
• Lean manufacturing
• Lean Six Sigma
• Statistical Process Control