Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
November 2010
As customers of 3Ms abrasives products provided feedbackfrequently complaintsto the sales, cus-
tomer service, and quality teams, the need for significant quality improvement was apparent. When the
executive vice president of the industrial and transportation unit declared the need for a quality revolu-
tion, he noted, To achieve our growth goals we need a step-change improvement in quality. Strategic
goals rolled down to every division, factory, and product line with annual targets. Soon thereafter, the
abrasives division established the following goals:
Specifically, the business unit initiated an improvement project to reduce belt DPPM from 12,000 to
500. To spearhead this work, the Abrasives Belt Fabrication Improvement Team was chartered in 2003.
The project worked to create value by providing more robust Data and data analysis were key in both the Top-200 and Lean
products that would perform better and longer to increase cus- Six Sigma improvement processes to help determine root causes
tomers productivity. This coincides with 3Ms corporate goal: and relationships. First, with the Top- 200, complaint and belt
Growth through customer success by building value for our cus- testing information was sliced and diced to support analysis
tomers. and conversations with key customers about problems they
experienced with belt products. 3M also established an extensive
Team members estimated that, if successful, the belt improvement data collection system to gather data from raw materials, process
project would have a positive impact on several goals, such as: information, finished product testing, and waste.
More robust products. Both internal and external stakeholders provided valuable input,
Reduced defects. as sales, technical service representatives, and end users supplied
Better processes and product understanding. problem information and samples. For example, team members
Increased process capability. met with a Top-200 customer to complete a cause and effect
matrix focusing on belt life and reasons why the belts could fail.
Using a Two-Pronged Approach for Quality Engaging customers in this type of partnering activity proved to
Improvement be a powerful business tool for the organization; subsequently
other business units have since replicated this approach.
When a situational analysis confirmed that belt and splice com-
plaints were the no. 1 quality complaint for industrial abrasives, The final root causes and improvement path selection for the
the team developed a two-pronged approach to steer improvement: Top-200 process followed an investigative approach. The team
used 5 Whys, stakeholder dialogue, consensus, and documenta-
Act immediately on the needs of 3Ms leading customers tion. On the other hand, statistical software to generate trend
through a Top-200 program. charts, compare data sets, and calculate capability values guided
Drive long-term continuous improvement with Lean Six the Lean Six Sigma path.
Sigma.
Validating Final Root Causes
Identifying Potential Root Causes
With final root causes in hand, the team validated each cause,
To pinpoint the root causes of belt complaints, the improvement as depicted in Figure 2. In the Top-200 program, the final
team used process mapping, cause and effect diagrams, Pareto causes centered around instructions, handling procedures, and
charts, and other quality tools. For the Top-200 process, the application settings. These were validated through internal test-
team used basic graphing, data analysis, and other communica- ing, audits, customer trials, and customer service visits. In the
tion tools to gather information from customers. Then, they Lean Six Sigma process, final root causes focused on equipment
began the Lean Six Sigma approach, attacking more chronic capability, process control, and inadequate testing. Gauge repeat-
problems with the structured define, measure, analyze, improve, ability and reproducibility (R&R) studies, equipment monitoring
Figure 1Methods and tools to identify root causes and improvement opportunities
Method Process: How, Who, Rationale Why Tool Was Used Possible Root Causes
Lack of procedures
Daily complaint review and Incomplete instructions
Top-200 Define Top-200 customers Analyze and communicate with sales
scorecard update Tests not predicting performance
Product uses/application
Product lab testing
CFR database
Tools Pareto by sales Customer visits
Excel
E-mail and phone
Who Sales management Manufacturing quality Quality coordinators
Equipment capability
Lean Six Sigma Define Measure Analyze Process measurement
Test method development
Process map Failure mode and effects analysis
Project charter Cause & effect (FMEA), Risk priority numbering
Tools
Stakeholder analysis Gauge R&R (RPN), Pareto chart, Process
Graphing capability, Control charts
Product manager
Who Black Belt, Green Belt, Project team Project team
Master Black Belt