We consider 5S and Visual Controls to be the foundation of Lean Manufacturing systems.

5S and Visual Controls are workplace organizational tools that provide the necessary groundwork for workplace improvement. 5S and Visual Controls ensure that there is a place for everything and that everything is in its placeclean and ready to use. Lean Manufacturing Solutions Inc. will educate your team in 5S and support them during the implementation of a pilot project. This project can be replicated in other areas. This education teaches employees to be self-directed and to adopt Lean Manufacturing throughout your facility. We can help you establish a team-based corporate culture that empowers your workforce and instills the desire for continuous improvement.

Benefits of 5S Improve safety Decrease down time Raise employee morale Identify problems more quickly Develop control through visibility Establish convenient work practices Increase product and process quality Strengthen employees pride in their work Promote stronger communication among staff Empower employees to sustain their work area

5S SORT The first stage of 5S is to organize the work area, leaving only the tools and materials necessary to perform daily activities. When sorting is well implemented, communication between workers is improved and product quality and productivity are increased.

5S SET IN ORDER The second stage of 5S involves the orderly arrangement of needed items so they are easy to use and accessible for anyone to find. Orderliness eliminates waste in production and clerical activities. 5S SHINE The third stage of 5S is keeping everything clean and swept. This maintains a safer work area and

problem areas are quickly identified. An important part of shining is Mess Prevention. In other words, dont allow litter, scrap, shavings, cuttings, etc., to land on the floor in the first place. Benefits of 5S Shine Eliminate spring cleaning Incorporate cleaning into daily routine Maintain clean and ready-to-use equipment We will help you Define shine target Identify shine methods Implement standardized cleanup Make Shine a natural part of your work day 5S STANDARDIZE The fourth stage of 5S involves creating a consistent approach for carrying out tasks and procedures. Orderliness is the core of standardization and is maintained by Visual Controls. We will teach the benefits of: Signboard strategy Signboard uses Painting strategy Colour-coding strategy Shadow boarding Standardize Best Methods across the organization 5S SUSTAIN This last stage of 5S is the discipline and commitment of all other stages. Without sustaining, your workplace can easily revert back to being dirty and chaotic. That is why it is so crucial for your team to be empowered to improve and maintain their workplace. When employees take pride in their work and workplace it can lead to greater job satisfaction and higher productivity.

5S (methodology) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2011) Tools drawer at a 5S working place 5S is the name of a workplace organization method that uses a list of five Japanese words: seiri, seiton, seiso, seiketsu, and shitsuke. Transliterated or translated into English, they all start with the letter "S". The list describes how to organize a work space for efficiency and effectiveness by identifying and storing the items used, maintaining the area and items, and sustaining the new order. The decision-making process usually comes from a dialogue about standardization, which builds understanding among employees of how they should do the work. Contents [hide]

1 The 5 S's 1.1 Sorting (Seiri) 1.2 Stabilizing or Straightening Out (Seiton) 1.3 Sweeping or Shining (Seiso) 1.4 Standardizing (Seiketsu) 1.5 Sustaining the Practice (Shitsuke) 2 Additional S's 2.1 Safety 2.2 Security 2.3 Satisfaction 3 The Origins of 5S 4 The Objectives of 5S 5 The Evolution of 5S 6 See also 7 References [edit]The 5 S's There are five primary 5S phases: sorting, straightening, systematic cleaning, standardizing, and sustaining. [edit]Sorting (Seiri) Eliminate all unnecessary tools, parts, and instructions. Go through all tools, materials, and so forth in the plant and work area. Keep only essential items and eliminate what is not required, prioritizing things per requirements and keeping them in easily-accessible places. Everything else is stored or discarded. [edit]Stabilizing or Straightening Out (Seiton) There should be a place for everything and everything should be in its place. The place for each item should be clearly indicated. Items should be arranged in a manner that promotes efficient work flow, with equipment used most often being the most easily accessible. Workers should not have to bend repetitively to access materials. Each tool, part, supply, or piece of equipment should be kept close to where it will be used in other words, straightening the flow path. Seiton is one of the features that distinguishes 5S from "standardized cleanup". This phase can also be referred to as Simplifying.[1] [edit]Sweeping or Shining (Seiso) Clean the workspace and all equipment, and keep it clean, tidy and organized. At the end of each shift, clean the work area and be sure everything is restored to its place. This makes it easy to know what goes where and ensures that everything is where it belongs. Spills, leaks, and other messes also then become a visual signal for equipment or process steps that need attention. A key point is that maintaining cleanliness should be part of the daily work not an occasional activity initiated when things get too messy. [edit]Standardizing (Seiketsu) Work practices should be consistent and standardized. All work stations for a particular job should be identical. All employees doing the same job should be able to work in any station with the same tools that are in the same location in every station. Everyone should know exactly what his or her responsibilities are for adhering to the first 3 S's. [edit]Sustaining the Practice (Shitsuke) Maintain and review standards. Once the previous 4 S's have been established, they become the new way to operate. Maintain focus on this new way and do not allow a gradual decline back to the old ways. While thinking about the new way, also be thinking about yet better ways. When an issue arises such as a suggested improvement, a new way of working, a new tool or a new output requirement, review the first 4 S's and make changes as appropriate. [edit]Additional S's Three other phases are sometimes included: safety, security, and satisfaction.[citation needed] [edit]Safety A sixth phase, "Safety", is sometimes added. There is debate over whether including this sixth "S" promotes safety by stating this value explicitly, or if a comprehensive safety program is undermined

when it is relegated to a single item in an efficiency-focused business methodology. [edit]Security A seventh phase, "Security", can also be added. To leverage security as an investment rather than an expense, the seventh "S" identifies and addresses risks to key business categories including fixed assets (PP&E), material, human capital, brand equity, intellectual property, information technology, assets-in-transit and the extended supply chain. [edit]Satisfaction An eighth phase, Satisfaction, can be included[citation needed]. Employee Satisfaction and engagement in continuous improvement activities ensures the improvements will be sustained and improved upon. The Eighth waste Non Utilized Intellect, Talent, and Resources can be the most damaging waste of all. It is important to have continuous education about maintaining standards. When there are changes that affect the 5S program such as new equipment, new products or new work rules, it is essential to make changes in the standards and provide training. Companies embracing 5S often use posters and signs as a way of educating employees and maintaining standards. [edit]The Origins of 5S 5S was developed in Japan. It was first heard of as one of the techniques that enabled what was then termed Just in Time Manufacturing. The Massachusetts Institute of Technologys 5-year study into the future of the automobile in the late 1980s[2] identified that the term was inappropriate since the Japanese success was built upon far more than components arriving only at the time of requirement. John Krafcik, a researcher on the project, ascribed Lean to the collective techniques being used in Japanese automobile manufacturing; it reflected the focus on waste in all its forms that was central to the Japanese approach. Minimised inventory was only one aspect of performance levels in companies such as Toyota [3] and in itself only arose from progress in fields such as quality assurance and Andon boards to highlight problems for immediate action. 5S was developed by Hiroyuki Hirano within his overall approach to production systems.[4] Many Western managers coming across the approach for the first time found the experience one of enlightenment. They had perhaps always known the role of housekeeping within optimised manufacturing performance and had always known the elements of best practice. However, Hirano provided a structure for improvement programs. He pointed out a series of identifiable steps, each building on its predecessor. Western managers, for example, had always recognised the need to decide upon locations for materials and tools and upon the flow of work through a work area; central to this (but perhaps implicit) is the principle that items not essential to the process should be removed stored elsewhere or eliminated completely. By differentiating between Seiri and Seiton, Hirano made the distinction explicit. He taught his audience that any effort to consider layout and flow before the removal of the unnecessary items was likely to lead to a sub-optimal solution. Equally the Seiso, or cleanliness, phase is a distinct element of the change program that can transform a process area. Hiranos view is that the definition of a cleaning methodology (Seiso) is a discrete activity, not to be confused with the organisation of the workplace, and this helps to structure any improvement program. It has to be recognised, however, that there is inevitably an overlap between Seiton and Seiso. Western managers understood that the opportunities for various cleanliness methodologies vary with the layout and storage mechanisms adopted. However, breaking down the improvement activity in this way clarifies that the requirements for the cleanliness regime must be understood as a factor in the design aspect of Seiton. As noted by John Bicheno,[5] Toyotas adoption of the Hirano approach, is 4S, with Seiton and Seiso combined presumably for this very reason. The improvement team must avoid the trap of designing the work area and then considering the cleanliness or tidiness mechanism. Hirano also reminded the world of the Hawthorne effect. We can all introduce change and while people in the business consider the change program to be under management focus the benefits of the change will continue, but when this focus has moved (as is inevitably the case) performance once more slips. Western managers, in particular, may have benefited from the distinction between the procedural or mechanical elements, Seiketsu, of keeping these matters in focus and the culture change, Shitsuke, which is a distinct approach to bringing about a new way of working. A number of publications on the subject in the West have questioned whether this culture can really be tackled as part of an exercise of relatively limited scope.[6] The broader kaizen, or continuous

improvement, approach is built, among other things, upon the companys valuation of all members of the workforce. If employees dont feel valued within the overall company culture, perhaps the change required falls outside the limits of a housekeeping improvement program. [edit]The Objectives of 5S Hirano identified a range of benefits from improved housekeeping, all of which can be regarded as falling within the Lean portfolio that is, they are all based around the elimination of waste in one form or another. The most obvious benefit from items being organized in such a way (i.e. that they are always readily available) is that of improved productivity. Production workers being diverted from production to look for tools, gauges, production paperwork, fasteners, and so on is the most frustrating form of lost time in any plant. A key aspect of Hiranos organisation approach is that the often-needed items are stored in the most accessible location and correct adoption of the standardisation approach means that they are returned to the correct location after use. Another element of Hiranos improved housekeeping is improved plant maintenance workers owning a piece of plant, responsible for keeping it clean and tidy, can take ownership for highlighting potential problems before they have an impact on performance. (Of course, this brings with it the interface with preventive maintenance and the need for clarity in the assignment map, that is who does what. The division of tasks between production workers and specialist maintenance engineers varies with the nature of the business, but ownership rests within the business unit rather than within the service provider.) The next aim is Quality. The degree of impact of dirt in a manufacturing environment, obviously, varies with the nature of the product and its process but there are few, if any, areas where dirt is welcome. Even if it is only in the form of soiled documentation accompanying the goods to the customer this can send a very negative message about the company and its culture. In other cases dirt can have a serious impact on product performance either directly or indirectly, perhaps through compromising the integrity of test processes. Of course, 5S does more than address dirt; an inappropriate layout can result, for example, in product damaged through excessive movement or through the use of tooling other than that defined as the standard. Standardisation is a theme of Hiranos approach, overlapping to a considerable extent with, for example, that of Ohno. A Standard Operating Procedure for tool certification is much easier to achieve if the tool to be certified is always in a clearly-marked location. Another goal is improved Health & Safety. Clear pathways between workbenches and storage racks can minimise accidents, as can properly-swept floors. As with Quality, a well-organised, clean and tidy facility lends itself more readily to standard practice. Hirano also described how an environment in which the workforce has pride in their workplace can contribute to a considerable extent in a number of ways including customer service. Improving the layout of the facility merges with the concept of visual management; if workers can see the status of plant and of work in the facility, thus removing the need for complex tracking and communication systems, then benefits will accrue. 5S can also be a valuable sales tool when potential customers visit; a well-organised, clean and tidy facility sends a message of a professional and well-organised supplier. One point made by all practitioners is that the adoption of 5S must be driven by goals. An article in the journal of the UKs Institute of Operations Management written by Mark Eaton and Keith Carpenter of the Engineering Employers Federation noted that the successful implementation of 5S requires that everyone understand why it is being used and what the expected results are. As with all Lean techniques the aim is improvement in business performance; the adoption is not an end in itself.. [edit]The Evolution of 5S This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability. Many Western companies now promote Hiranos approach with a sixth S added for Quality. Not unnaturally, there is some debate over this, with devotees on both sides of the argument. The sixth S serves a fundamental purpose it reminds everyone of the need for Quality. A key lesson taught by Japanese automobile manufacturers, and one central to the Toyota Production System, is that traditional levels of performance must be not only exceeded, but replaced by a completely different perception of the scale of what is acceptable. Rather than managing defects in percentage terms,

Western managers heard of management in parts per millions, with single-figure levels of defects being the goal. Given that a 1% failure rate equates to 10,000 ppm the scale of improvement to be sought as part of the adoption of Lean was, to say the least, spectacular. This improvement in quality levels could, of course, only be achieved with a complete re-definition of processes and culture within Western manufacturing. This includes issues such as Design for Manufacturing and the fundamental change from Quality Control to Quality Assurance (that is, the Quality department role moving from inspecting and highlighting problems to guaranteeing methods and procedures to eliminate errors). Housekeeping, of course, is central to this and adding a sixth S highlights this. The contrasting view, and the one taken by Hirano in establishing this approach, is that each and every S is a phase. As noted earlier, a major lesson for Westerners was Hiranos 5S methodology breaking the program down into a series of steps. The sixth S does not add to this; Quality is not a phase, it is an objective along with productivity and the others described above. Moreover, it is an objective of each and every phase. Adding the sixth S might be perceived as recommending a program carrying out the sorting out, organising, cleanliness, procedural and cultural steps and subsequently building in Quality, which of course is not possible. If all the objectives have not been built in throughout each element of the definition of the new way of working then they can not be applied as an additional phase.

Kaizen
Kaizen (?), Japanese for "improvement", or "change for the better" refers to philosophy or practices that focus upon continuous improvement of processes in manufacturing, engineering, game development, and business management. It has been applied in healthcare,[1] psychotherapy,[2] life-coaching, government, banking, and other industries. When used in the business sense and applied to the workplace, kaizen refers to activities that continually improve all functions, and involves all employees from the CEO to the assembly line workers. It also applies to processes, such as purchasing and logistics, that cross organizational boundaries into the supply chain.[3] By improving standardized activities and processes, kaizen aims to eliminate waste (see lean manufacturing). Kaizen was first implemented in several Japanese businesses after the Second World War, influenced in part by American business and quality management teachers who visited the country. It has since spread throughout the world[4] and is now being implemented in many other venues besides just business and productivity. Contents [hide] 1 Introduction 2 History 3 Implementation 3.1 The five main elements of kaizen 4 See also 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External links [edit]Introduction Kaizen is a daily process, the purpose of which goes beyond simple productivity improvement. It is also a process that, when done correctly, humanizes the workplace, eliminates overly hard work ("muri"), and teaches people how to perform experiments

on their work using the scientific method and how to learn to spot and eliminate waste in business processes. In all, the process suggests a humanized approach to workers and to increasing productivity: "The idea is to nurture the company's human resources as much as it is to praise and encourage participation in kaizen activities."[5] Successful implementation requires "the participation of workers in the improvement."[6] People at all levels of an organization participate in kaizen, from the CEO down to janitorial staff, as well as external stakeholders when applicable. The format for kaizen can be individual, suggestion system, small group, or large group. At Toyota, it is usually a local improvement within a workstation or local area and involves a small group in improving their own work environment and productivity. This group is often guided through the kaizen process by a line supervisor; sometimes this is the line supervisor's key role. Kaizen on a broad, cross-departmental scale in companies, generates total quality management, and frees human efforts through improving productivity using machines and computing power.[citation needed] While kaizen (at Toyota) usually delivers small improvements, the culture of continual aligned small improvements and standardization yields large results in the form of compound productivity improvement. This philosophy differs from the "command and control" improvement programs of the mid-twentieth century. Kaizen methodology includes making changes and monitoring results, then adjusting. Large-scale preplanning and extensive project scheduling are replaced by smaller experiments, which can be rapidly adapted as new improvements are suggested.[citation needed] In modern usage, it is designed to address a particular issue over the course of a week and is referred to as a "kaizen blitz" or "kaizen event". These are limited in scope, and issues that arise from them are typically used in later blitzes.[citation needed] [edit]History After WWII, to help restore Japan, American occupation forces brought in American experts to help with the rebuilding of Japanese industry while The Civil Communications Section (CCS) developed a Management Training Program that taught statistical control methods as part of the overall material. This course was developed and taught by Homer Sarasohn and Charles Protzman in 1949-50. Sarasohn recommended W. Edwards Deming for further training in Statistical Methods. The Economic and Scientific Section (ESS) group was also tasked with improving Japanese management skills and Edgar McVoy was instrumental in bringing Lowell Mellen to Japan to properly install the Training Within Industry (TWI) programs in 1951. Prior to the arrival of Mellen in 1951, the ESS group had a training film to introduce the three TWI "J" programs (Job Instruction, Job Methods and Job Relations)---the film was titled "Improvement in 4 Steps" (Kaizen eno Yon Dankai). Thus the original introduction of "Kaizen" to Japan. For the pioneering, introduction, and implementation of Kaizen in Japan, the Emperor of Japan awarded the 2nd Order Medal of the Sacred Treasure to Dr. Deming in 1960. Consequently, the Union of Japanese Science and Engineering (JUSE) instituted the annual Deming Prizes for achievement in quality and dependability of products. On October 18, 1989, JUSE awarded the Deming Prize to Florida Power & Light Co. (FPL), based in the US, for its exceptional accomplishments in process and quality control management. FPL was the first company outside Japan to win the Deming Prize. Reference: US National Archives - SCAP collection - PR NewsWire [edit]Implementation The Toyota Production System is known for kaizen, where all line personnel are expected to stop their moving production line in case of any abnormality and, along with their supervisor, suggest an improvement to resolve the abnormality which may initiate a kaizen.

The PDCA cycles[7] The cycle of kaizen activity can be defined as: Standardize an operation and activities. Measure the standardized operation (find cycle time and amount of in-process inventory) Gauge measurements against requirements Innovate to meet requirements and increase productivity Standardize the new, improved operations Continue cycle ad infinitum This is also known as the Shewhart cycle, Deming cycle, or PDCA. Other techniques used in conjunction with PDCA include 5 Whys, which is a form of root cause analysis in which the user asks "why" to a problem and its answer five successive times. There are normally a series of root causes stemming from one problem,[8] and they can be visualized using fishbone diagrams or tables. Masaaki Imai made the term famous in his book Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. Apart from business applications of the method, both Anthony Robbins[citation needed] and Robert Maurer have popularized the kaizen principles into personal development principles. In the book One Small Step Can Change Your life: The Kaizen Way, and CD set The Kaizen Way to Success, Maurer looks at how individuals can take a kaizen approach in both their personal and professional lives.[9][10] In the Toyota Way Fieldbook, Liker and Meier discuss the kaizen blitz and kaizen burst (or kaizen event) approaches to continuous improvement. A kaizen blitz, or rapid improvement, is a focused activity on a particular process or activity. The basic concept is to identify and quickly remove waste. Another approach is that of the kaizen burst, a specific kaizen activity on a particular process in the value stream.[11] WebKaizen Events, written by Kate Cornell, condenses the philosophies of kaizen events into a one-day, problem solving method that leads to prioritized solutions. This method combines Kaizen Event tools with PMP concepts. It introduces the Focused Affinity Matrix and the Cascading Impact Analysis. The Impact/Constraint Diagram and the Dual Constraint Diagram are tools used in this method.[12] Key elements of kaizen are quality, effort, involvement of all employees, willingness to change, and communication. [edit]The five main elements of kaizen This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability. Teamwork Personal discipline Improved morale Quality circles Suggestions for improvement Kaizen is a system of continuous improvement in quality, technology, processes, company culture, productivity, safety and leadership. We'll look at Kaizen by answering three questions: What is Kaizen? What are the benefits of Kaizen? What do you need to do to get started using Kaizen principles? Kaizen was created in Japan following World War II. The word Kaizen means "continuous improvement". It comes from the Japanese words ("kai") which means "change" or "to correct" and ("zen") which means "good".

Kaizen is a system that involves every employee - from upper management to the cleaning crew. Everyone is encouraged to come up with small improvement suggestions on a regular basis. This is not a once a month or once a year activity. It is continuous. Japanese companies, such as Toyota and Canon, a total of 60 to 70 suggestions per employee per year are written down, shared and implemented. In most cases these are not ideas for major changes. Kaizen is based on making little changes on a regular basis: always improving productivity, safety and effectiveness while reducing waste. Suggestions are not limited to a specific area such as production or marketing. Kaizen is based on making changes anywhere that improvements can be made. Western philosophy may be summarized as, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." The Kaizen philosophy is to "do it better, make it better, improve it even if it isn't broken, because if we don't, we can't compete with those who do." Kaizen in Japan is a system of improvement that includes both home and business life. Kaizen even includes social activities. It is a concept that is applied in every aspect of a person's life. In business Kaizen encompasses many of the components of Japanese businesses that have been seen as a part of their success. Quality circles, automation, suggestion systems, just-in-time delivery, Kanban and 5S are all included within the Kaizen system of running a business. Kaizen involves setting standards and then continually improving those standards. To support the higher standards Kaizen also involves providing the training, materials and supervision that is needed for employees to achieve the higher standards and maintain their ability to meet those standards on an on-going basis. More information about Kaizen: Benefits of Kaizen - What Kaizen can do for you. Read about how Kaizen helped Fleetwood and Sony. Getting Started With Kaizen - A brief overview describing how to start to use Kaizen in your company. 5S - A 5S Program is often associated with Kaizen. Lean Manufacturing - A case study at Mathers Controls.

Six Sigma
Six Sigma From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Not to be confused with Sigma 6.

Six Sigma is a business management strategy, originally developed by Motorola in 1986.[1][2] Six Sigma became well known after Jack Welch made it a central focus of his business strategy at General Electric in 1995[3], and today it is widely used in many sectors of industry. Six Sigma seeks to improve the quality of process outputs by identifying and removing the causes of defects (errors) and minimizing variability in manufacturing and business processes.[4] It uses a set of quality management methods, including statistical methods, and creates a special infrastructure of people within the organization ("Black Belts", "Green Belts", etc.) who are experts in these methods.[4] Each Six Sigma project carried out within an organization follows a defined sequence of steps and has quantified financial targets (cost reduction and/or profit increase).[4] The term Six Sigma originated from terminology associated with manufacturing, specifically terms associated with statistical modeling of manufacturing processes. The maturity of a manufacturing process can be described by a sigma rating indicating its yield, or the percentage of defect-free products it creates. A six sigma process is one in which 99.99966% of the products manufactured are statistically expected to be free of defects (3.4 defects per million). Motorola set a goal of "six sigma" for all of its manufacturing operations, and this goal became a byword for the management and engineering practices used to achieve it. Contents [hide] 1 Historical overview 2 Methods 2.1 DMAIC 2.2 DMADV or DFSS 2.3 Quality management tools and methods used in Six Sigma 3 Implementation roles 3.1 Certification 4 Origin and meaning of the term "six sigma process" 4.1 Role of the 1.5 sigma shift 4.2 Sigma levels 5 Software used for Six Sigma 5.1 Analysis tools 6 Application 6.1 In healthcare 7 Criticism 7.1 Lack of originality 7.2 Role of consultants 7.3 Potential negative effects 7.4 Lack of evidence of its success 7.5 Based on arbitrary standards 7.6 Criticism of the 1.5 sigma shift 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading [edit]Historical overview Six Sigma originated as a set of practices designed to improve manufacturing processes and eliminate defects, but its application was subsequently extended to other types of business processes as well.[5] In Six Sigma, a defect is defined as any process output that does not meet customer specifications, or that could lead to creating an output that does not meet customer specifications.[4] The core of Six Sigma was born at Motorola in the 1970s out of senior executive Art Sundry's criticism of Motorolas bad quality.[6] As a result of this criticism, the company discovered a connection between increases in quality and decreases in costs of production. At that time, the prevailing view was that quality costs extra money. In fact, it reduced total costs by driving down the costs for repair or control.[7] Bill Smith subsequently formulated the particulars of the methodology at Motorola in 1986.[1] Six Sigma was heavily inspired by the quality improvement methodologies of the six preceding decades, such as quality control, Total Quality Management (TQM), and Zero

Defects,[8][9] based on the work of pioneers such as Shewhart, Deming, Juran, Crosby, Ishikawa, Taguchi, and others. Like its predecessors, Six Sigma doctrine asserts that: Continuous efforts to achieve stable and predictable process results (i.e., reduce process variation) are of vital importance to business success. Manufacturing and business processes have characteristics that can be measured, analyzed, improved and controlled. Achieving sustained quality improvement requires commitment from the entire organization, particularly from top-level management. Features that set Six Sigma apart from previous quality improvement initiatives include: A clear focus on achieving measurable and quantifiable financial returns from any Six Sigma project.[4] An increased emphasis on strong and passionate management leadership and support.[4] A special infrastructure of "Champions", "Master Black Belts", "Black Belts", "Green Belts", "Red Belts" etc. to lead and implement the Six Sigma approach.[4] A clear commitment to making decisions on the basis of verifiable data, rather than assumptions and guesswork.[4] The term "Six Sigma" comes from a field of statistics known as process capability studies. Originally, it referred to the ability of manufacturing processes to produce a very high proportion of output within specification. Processes that operate with "six sigma quality" over the short term are assumed to produce long-term defect levels below 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO). [10][11] 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.[12] As of 2006 Motorola reported over US$17 billion in savings[13] from Six Sigma. Other early adopters of Six Sigma who achieved well-publicized success include Honeywell (previously known as AlliedSignal) and General Electric, where Jack Welch introduced the method.[14] By the late 1990s, about two-thirds of the Fortune 500 organizations had begun Six Sigma initiatives with the aim of reducing costs and improving quality.[15] In recent years, some practitioners have combined Six Sigma ideas with lean manufacturing to create a methodology named Lean Six Sigma.[16] The Lean Six Sigma methodology views lean manufacturing, which addresses process flow and waste issues, and Six Sigma, with its focus on variation and design, as complementary disciplines aimed at promoting "business and operational excellence".[16] Companies such as IBM use Lean Six Sigma to focus transformation efforts not just on efficiency but also on growth. It serves as a foundation for innovation throughout the organization, from manufacturing and software development to sales and service delivery functions. [edit]Methods Six Sigma projects follow two project methodologies inspired by Deming's Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle. These methodologies, composed of five phases each, bear the acronyms DMAIC and DMADV.[15] DMAIC is used for projects aimed at improving an existing business process.[15] DMAIC is pronounced as "duh-may-ick". DMADV is used for projects aimed at creating new product or process designs.[15] DMADV is pronounced as "duh-mad-vee". [edit]DMAIC The DMAIC project methodology has five phases: Define the problem, the voice of the customer, and the project goals, specifically. Measure key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data. Analyze the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships. Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation. Improve or optimize the current process based upon data analysis using techniques such as design of experiments, poka yoke or mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new, future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability. Control the future state process to ensure that any deviations from target are corrected before they result in defects. Implement control systems such as statistical process control, production boards,

visual workplaces, and continuously monitor the process. Some organizations add a Recognize step at the beginning, which is to recognize the right problem to work on, thus yielding an RDMAIC methodology.[17] [edit]DMADV or DFSS The DMADV project methodology, also known as DFSS ("Design For Six Sigma"),[15] features five phases: Define design goals that are consistent with customer demands and the enterprise strategy. Measure and identify CTQs (characteristics that are Critical To Quality), product capabilities, production process capability, and risks. Analyze to develop and design alternatives, create a high-level design and evaluate design capability to select the best design. Design details, optimize the design, and plan for design verification. This phase may require simulations. Verify the design, set up pilot runs, implement the production process and hand it over to the process owner(s). [edit]Quality management tools and methods used in Six Sigma Within the individual phases of a DMAIC or DMADV project, Six Sigma utilizes many established quality-management tools that are also used outside Six Sigma. The following table shows an overview of the main methods used. 5 Whys Analysis of variance ANOVA Gauge R&R Axiomatic design Business Process Mapping Cause & effects diagram (also known as fishbone or Ishikawa diagram) Check sheet Chi-squared test of independence and fits Control chart Correlation Cost-benefit analysis CTQ tree Design of experiments Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) General linear model Histograms Pareto analysis Pareto chart Pick chart Process capability Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Quantitative marketing research through use of Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) systems Regression analysis Rolled throughput yield Root cause analysis Run charts Scatter diagram SIPOC analysis (Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Customers) Stratification Taguchi methods Taguchi Loss Function TRIZ [edit]Implementation roles One key innovation of Six Sigma involves the "professionalizing" of quality management functions. Prior to Six Sigma, quality management in practice was largely relegated to the production floor and to statisticians in a separate quality department. Formal Six Sigma programs adopt a ranking

terminology (similar to some martial arts systems) to define a hierarchy (and career path) that cuts across all business functions. Six Sigma identifies several key roles for its successful implementation.[18] Executive Leadership includes the CEO and other members of top management. 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 take responsibility for Six Sigma implementation across the organization in an integrated manner. The Executive Leadership draws them from upper management. Champions also act as mentors to Black Belts. Master Black Belts, identified by champions, act as in-house coaches on Six Sigma. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma. They assist champions and guide Black Belts and Green Belts. Apart from statistical tasks, they spend their time on ensuring consistent application of Six Sigma across various functions and departments. 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, operating under the guidance of Black Belts. Some organizations use additional belt colours, such as Yellow Belts, for employees that have basic training in Six Sigma tools and generally participate in projects and 'white belts' for those locally trained in the concepts but do not participate in the project team.[19] [edit]Certification Corporations such as early Six Sigma pioneers General Electric and Motorola developed certification programs as part of their Six Sigma implementation, verifying individuals' command of the Six Sigma methods at the relevant skill level (Green Belt, Black Belt etc.). Following this approach, many organizations in the 1990s started offering Six Sigma certifications to their employees.[15][20] Criteria for Green Belt and Black Belt certification vary; some companies simply require participation in a course and a Six Sigma project.[20] There is no standard certification body, and different certification services are offered by various quality associations and other providers against a fee.[21][22] The American Society for Quality for example requires Black Belt applicants to pass a written exam and to provide a signed affidavit stating that they have completed two projects, or one project combined with three years' practical experience in the body of knowledge.[20][23] The International Quality Federation offers an online certification exam that organizations can use for their internal certification programs; it is statistically more demanding than the ASQ certification.[20][22] Other providers offering certification services include the Institute of Industrial Engineers, the Juran Institute, Six Sigma Qualtec, Aveta Business Institute, Air Academy Associates and others.[21] [edit]Origin and meaning of the term "six sigma process" The term "six sigma process" comes from the notion that if one has six standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit, as shown in the graph, practically no items will fail to meet specifications.[11] This is based on the calculation method employed in process capability studies. Capability studies measure the number of standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in sigma units. As process standard deviation goes up, or the mean of the process moves away from the center of the tolerance, fewer standard deviations will fit between the mean and the nearest specification limit, decreasing the sigma number and increasing the likelihood of items outside specification.[11] Graph of the normal distribution, which underlies the statistical assumptions of the Six Sigma model. The Greek letter (sigma) marks the distance on the horizontal axis between the mean, , and the curve's inflection point. The greater this distance, the greater is the spread of values encountered. For the green curve shown above, = 0 and = 1. The upper and lower specification limits (USL and LSL, respectively) are at a distance of 6 from the mean. Because of the properties of the normal distribution, values lying that far away from

the mean are extremely unlikely. Even if the mean were to move right or left by 1.5 at some point in the future (1.5 sigma shift, coloured red and blue), there is still a good safety cushion. This is why Six Sigma aims to have processes where the mean is at least 6 away from the nearest specification limit. [edit]Role of the 1.5 sigma shift Experience has shown that processes usually do not perform as well in the long term as they do in the short term.[11] As a result, the number of sigmas that will fit between the process mean and the nearest specification limit may well drop over time, compared to an initial short-term study.[11] To account for this real-life increase in process variation over time, an empirically-based 1.5 sigma shift is introduced into the calculation.[11][24] According to this idea, a process that fits 6 sigma between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in a short-term study will in the long term fit only 4.5 sigma either because the process mean will move over time, or because the long-term standard deviation of the process will be greater than that observed in the short term, or both.[11] Hence the widely accepted definition of a six sigma process is a process that produces 3.4 defective parts per million opportunities (DPMO). This is based on the fact that 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).[11] So the 3.4 DPMO of a six sigma process in fact corresponds to 4.5 sigma, namely 6 sigma minus the 1.5-sigma shift introduced to account for long-term variation.[11] This allows for the fact that special causes may result in a deterioration in process performance over time, and is designed to prevent underestimation of the defect levels likely to be encountered in real-life operation.[11] [edit]Sigma levels A control chart depicting a process that experienced a 1.5 sigma drift in the process mean toward the upper specification limit starting at midnight. Control charts are used to maintain 6 sigma quality by signaling when quality professionals should investigate a process to find and eliminate special-cause variation. See also: Three sigma rule The table[25][26] below gives long-term DPMO values corresponding to various shortterm sigma levels. It must be understood that these figures assume that the process mean will shift by 1.5 sigma toward the side with the critical specification limit. In other words, they assume that after the initial study determining the short-term sigma level, the longterm Cpk value will turn out to be 0.5 less than the short-term Cpk value. So, for example, the DPMO figure given for 1 sigma assumes that the long-term process mean will be 0.5 sigma beyond the specification limit (Cpk = 0.17), rather than 1 sigma within it, as it was in the short-term study (Cpk = 0.33). Note that the defect percentages indicate only defects exceeding the specification limit to which the process mean is nearest. Defects beyond the far specification limit are not included in the percentages. Sigma level DPMO Percent defective Percentage yield Short-term Cpk Long-term Cpk 1 691,462 69% 31% 0.33 0.17 2 308,538 31% 69% 0.67 0.17 3 66,807 6.7% 93.3% 1.00 0.5 4 6,210 0.62% 99.38% 1.33 0.83 5 233 0.023% 99.977% 1.67 1.17 6 3.4 0.00034% 99.99966% 2.00 1.5 7 0.019 0.0000019% 99.9999981% 2.33 1.83 [edit]Software used for Six Sigma

There are generally four classes of software used to support Six Sigma: Analysis tools, which are used to perform statistical or process analysis Program management tools, used to manage and track a corporation's entire Six Sigma program DMAIC and Lean online project collaboration tools for local and global teams Data Collection tools that feed information directly into the analysis tools and significantly reduce the time spent gathering data [edit]Analysis tools Arena ARIS Six Sigma Bonita Open Solution BPMN2 standard and KPIs for statistic monitoring JMP Microsoft Visio Minitab R language (The R Project for Statistical Computing[27]). Open source software: statistical and graphic functions from the base instalation can be used for Six Sigma projects. Furthermore, some contributed packages at CRAN contain specific tools for Six Sigma: SixSigma,[28] qualityTools,[29] qcc[30] and IQCC.[31] SDI Tools SigmaXL Software AG webMethods BPM Suite SPC XL Statgraphics STATISTICA [edit]Application Main article: List of Six Sigma companies Six Sigma mostly finds application in large organizations.[32] An important factor in the spread of Six Sigma was GE's 1998 announcement of $350 million in savings thanks to Six Sigma, a figure that later grew to more than $1 billion.[32] According to industry consultants like Thomas Pyzdek and John Kullmann, companies with fewer than 500 employees are less suited to Six Sigma implementation, or need to adapt the standard approach to make it work for them.[32] This is due both to the infrastructure of Black Belts that Six Sigma requires, and to the fact that large organizations present more opportunities for the kinds of improvements Six Sigma is suited to bringing about.[32] [edit]In healthcare Six Sigma strategies were initially applied to the healthcare industry in March 1998. The Commonwealth Health Corporation (CHC) was the first health care organization to successfully implement the efficient strategies of Six Sigma.[33] Substantial financial benefits were claimed, for example in their radiology department throughput improved by 33% and costs per radiology procedure decreased by 21.5%;[34] Six Sigma has subsequently been adopted in other hospitals around the world.[35][36] Critics of Six Sigma believe that while Six Sigma methods may have translated fluidly in a manufacturing setting, they would not have the same result in service-oriented businesses, such as the health industry.[37] [edit]Criticism This section uses bare URLs for citations. Please consider adding full citations so that the article remains verifiable. Several templates and the Reflinks tool are available to assist in formatting. (Reflinks documentation) (January 2012) [edit]Lack of originality Noted quality expert Joseph M. Juran has described Six Sigma as "a basic version of quality improvement", stating that "there is nothing new there. It includes what we

used to call facilitators. They've adopted more flamboyant terms, like belts with different colors. I think that concept has merit to set apart, to create specialists who can be very helpful. Again, that's not a new idea. The American Society for Quality long ago established certificates, such as for reliability engineers."[38] [edit]Role of consultants The use of "Black Belts" as itinerant change agents has (controversially) fostered an industry of training and certification. Critics argue there is overselling of Six Sigma by too great a number of consulting firms, many of which claim expertise in Six Sigma when they have only a rudimentary understanding of the tools and techniques involved.[4] [edit]Potential negative effects A Fortune article stated that "of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent have trailed the S&P 500 since". The statement was attributed to "an analysis by Charles Holland of consulting firm Qualpro (which espouses a competing quality-improvement process)."[39] The summary of the article is that Six Sigma is effective at what it is intended to do, but that it is "narrowly designed to fix an existing process" and does not help in "coming up with new products or disruptive technologies." Advocates of Six Sigma have argued that many of these claims are in error or ill-informed.[40][41] A more direct criticism is the "rigid" nature of Six Sigma with its over-reliance on methods and tools. In most cases, more attention is paid to reducing variation and less attention is paid to developing robustness (which can altogether eliminate the need for reducing variation).[42] Articles featuring critics have appeared in the November-December 2006 issue of USA Army Logistician regarding Six-Sigma: "The dangers of a single paradigmatic orientation (in this case, that of technical rationality) can blind us to values associated with double-loop learning and the learning organization, organization adaptability, workforce creativity and development, humanizing the workplace, cultural awareness, and strategy making."[43] A BusinessWeek article says that James McNerney's introduction of Six Sigma at 3M had the effect of stifling creativity and reports its removal from the research function. It cites two Wharton School professors who say that Six Sigma leads to incremental innovation at the expense of blue skies research.[44] This phenomenon is further explored in the book Going Lean, which describes a related approach known as lean dynamics and provides data to show that Ford's "6 Sigma" program did little to change its fortunes.[45] [edit]Lack of evidence of its success In articles and especially on Internet sites and in text books, claims are made about the huge successes and millions of dollars that Six Sigma has saved. Six Sigma seems to be a "silver bullet" method. However, there does not seem to be trustworthy evidence for this: [P]robably more to the Six Sigma literature than concepts, relates to the evidence for Six Sigmas success. So far, documented case studies using the Six Sigma methods are presented as the strongest evidence for its success. However, looking at these documented cases, and apart from a few that are detailed from the experience of leading organizations like GE and Motorola, most cases are not documented in a systemic or academic manner. In fact, the majority are case studies illustrated on websites, and are, at best, sketchy. They provide no mention of any specific Six Sigma methods that were used to resolve the problems. It has been argued that by relying on the Six Sigma criteria, management is lulled into the idea that something is being done about quality, whereas any resulting improvement is accidental (Latzko 1995). Thus, when looking at the evidence put forward for Six Sigma success, mostly by consultants and people with vested interests, the question that begs to be asked is: are we making a true improvement with Six Sigma methods or just getting skilled at telling stories? Everyone seems to believe that we are making true improvements, but there is some

way to go to document these empirically and clarify the causal relations.[42] [edit]Based on arbitrary standards While 3.4 defects per million opportunities might work well for certain products/processes, it might not operate optimally or cost effectively for others. A pacemaker process might need higher standards, for example, whereas a direct mail advertising campaign might need lower standards. The basis and justification for choosing six (as opposed to five or seven, for example) as the number of standard deviations, together with the 1.5 sigma shift is not clearly explained. In addition, the Six Sigma model assumes that the process data always conform to the normal distribution. The calculation of defect rates for situations where the normal distribution model does not apply is not properly addressed in the current Six Sigma literature. This particularly counts for reliability-related defects and other problems that are not time invariant. The IEC, ARP, EN-ISO, DIN and other (inter)national standardization organizations have not created standards for the Six Sigma process. This might be the reason that it became a dominant domain of consultants (see critics above).[4] [edit]Criticism of the 1.5 sigma shift The statistician Donald J. Wheeler has dismissed the 1.5 sigma shift as "goofy" because of its arbitrary nature.[46] Its universal applicability is seen as doubtful.[4] The 1.5 sigma shift has also become contentious because it results in stated "sigma levels" that reflect short-term rather than long-term performance: a process that has long-term defect levels corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance is, by Six Sigma convention, described as a "six sigma process."[11][47] The accepted Six Sigma scoring system thus cannot be equated to actual normal distribution probabilities for the stated number of standard deviations, and this has been a key bone of contention over how Six Sigma measures are defined.[47] The fact that it is rarely explained that a "6 sigma" process will have long-term defect rates corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance rather than actual 6 sigma performance has led several commentators to express the opinion that Six Sigma is a confidence trick.[11]

7 QC TOOLS
Seven Basic Tools of Quality From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Seven Basic Tools of Quality is a designation given to a fixed set of graphical techniques identified as being most helpful in troubleshooting issues related to quality.[1] They are called basic because they are suitable for people with little formal training in statistics and because they can be used to solve the vast majority of quality-related issues.[2]:198 The tools are:[3] The cause-and-effect (a.k.a., "fishbone" or Ishikawa diagram) The check sheet The control chart The histogram The Pareto chart The scatter diagram

Stratification (alternately flow chart or run chart) The designation arose in postwar Japan, inspired by the seven famous weapons of Benkei.[4] At that time, companies that had set about training their workforces in statistical quality control found that the complexity of the subject intimidated the vast majority of their workers and scaled back training to focus primarily on simpler methods which suffice for most quality-related issues anyway. [2]:18 The Seven Basic Tools stand in contrast with more advanced statistical methods such as survey sampling, acceptance sampling, statistical hypothesis testing, design of experiments, multivariate analysis, and various methods developed in the field of operations research.[2]:199

ISO
International Organization for Standardization From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "ISO" redirects here. For other uses, see ISO (disambiguation). International Organization for Standardization Organisation internationale de normalisation [1] English language logo of the ISO List of members Formation 23 February 1947 Type NGO Purpose/focus International standardization Headquarters Geneva, Switzerland Membership 163 members[2] Official languages English, French, and Russian[3] Website www.iso.org The International Organization for Standardization (French: Organisation internationale de normalisation, Russian: , tr. Myezhdunarodnaya organizatsiya po standartizatsii),[1] widely known as ISO, is an international standard-setting body composed of representatives from various national standards organizations. Founded on February 23, 1947, the organization promulgates worldwide proprietary, industrial, and commercial standards. It has its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.[2] Contents [hide] 1 Name and abbreviation 2 History 3 Financing 4 International Standards and other publications 5 Standardization process 6 ISO document copyright 7 Members 8 Products named after ISO 9 ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1 10 Criticism 11 See also 12 Notes and references 13 Further reading 14 External links [edit]Name and abbreviation

The three official languages of the ISO are English, French, and Russian.[3] The organization's logos in two of its official languages, English and French, include the word ISO, and it is usually referred to by this short-form name. The organization says that ISO is not an acronym or initialism for the organization's full name in either official language; rather, recognizing that its initials would be different in different languages, it adopted ISO, based on the Greek word isos ( , meaning equal), as the universal short form of its name.[4] However, one of the founding delegates, Willy Kuert, recollected the original naming question with the comment: "I recently read that the name ISO was chosen because 'iso' is a Greek term meaning 'equal'. There was no mention of that in London!"[5] [edit]History

Memory plaque of founding ISA in Prague The organization today known as ISO began in 1926 as the International Federation of the National Standardizing Associations (ISA).[6] This organization focused heavily on mechanical engineering. It was disbanded in 1942 during the Second World War but was re-organized under the current name, ISO, in 1946.[citation needed] ISO is a voluntary organization whose members are recognized authorities on standards, each one representing one country. The bulk of the work of ISO is done by the 2700 technical committees, subcommittees, and working groups. Each committee and subcommittee is headed by a Secretariat from one of the member organizations. [citation needed] [edit]Financing ISO is funded by a combination of:[7][8] Organizations that manage the specific projects or loan experts to participate in the technical work. Subscriptions from member bodies ("the national body most representative of standardization in its country"[9]). These subscriptions are in proportion to each country's gross national product and trade figures. Sale of standards. [edit]International Standards and other publications See also: List of International Organization for Standardization standards ISO's main products are international standards. ISO also publishes technical reports, technical specifications, publicly available specifications, technical corrigenda, and guides.[10][11] International standards are designated with the format ISO[/IEC] [/ASTM] [IS] nnnnn[p]:[yyyy] Title, where nnnnn is the number of the standard, p is an optional part number, yyyy is the year published, and Title describes the subject. IEC for International Electrotechnical Commission is included if the standard results from the work of ISO/IEC JTC1 (the ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee). ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) is used for standards developed in cooperation with ASTM International. The date and IS are not used for an incomplete or unpublished standard and may under some circumstances be left off the title of a published work. Technical reports are issued when a technical committee or subcommittee has collected data of a different kind from that normally published as an International Standard.[10] such as references and explanations. The naming conventions for these are the same as for standards, except TR prepended instead of IS in the report's name. Examples: ISO/IEC TR 17799:2000 Code of Practice for Information Security Management ISO/TR 19033:2000 Technical product documentation Metadata for construction

documentation Technical specifications can be produced when "the subject in question is still under development or where for any other reason there is the future but not immediate possibility of an agreement to publish an International Standard". Publicly Available Specifications may be "an intermediate specification, published prior to the development of a full International Standard, or, in IEC may be a 'dual logo' publication published in collaboration with an external organization".[10] Both are named by convention similar to Technical Reports, for example: ISO/TS 16952-1:2006 Technical product documentation Reference designation system Part 1: General application rules ISO/PAS 11154:2006 Road vehicles Roof load carriers ISO sometimes issues technical corrigenda. Corrigenda (plural of corrigendum) are amendments to existing standards because of minor technical flaws, usability improvements, or limited applicability extensions. Generally, these are issued with the expectation that the affected standard will be updated or withdrawn at its next scheduled review.[10] ISO Guides are meta-standards covering "matters related to international standardization".[10] They are named in the format "ISO[/IEC] Guide N:yyyy: Title", for example: ISO/IEC Guide 2:2004 Standardization and related activities General vocabulary ISO/IEC Guide 65:1996 General requirements for bodies operating product certification