Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 69

Black Belt Refresher

© 2001 ConceptFlow 1
SPACER

• Safety
• Purpose
• Agenda
• Code of Conduct
• Expectations
• Roles

© 2001 ConceptFlow 2
Safety

• Drills
• Issues





• Emotional

© 2001 ConceptFlow 3
Purpose

• Education: Review of the methodology and tools learned in Black Belt


training

• Practical Exercises: Provide a refresher for use and interpretation of


the tools

© 2001 ConceptFlow 4
Agenda

Roadmap of the Phases


The 12 Step Process
Supporting tools

© 2001 ConceptFlow 5
Administrivia

• Breaks
• Lunch
• Pagers, Blackberrys & Cell Phones
• Facilities


© 2001 ConceptFlow 6
Code of Conduct

• Stay focused
• Openness and trust
• One person speaks at a time
• No whining
• Breaks as needed
• Start and stop on time
• Enjoy learning
• Your turn....

© 2001 ConceptFlow 7
Your Expectations?

© 2001 ConceptFlow 8
Roles

• Black Belts
• Facilitator
• Others

© 2001 ConceptFlow 9
The Breakthrough Strategy

© 2001 ConceptFlow 10
Module Objectives

By the end of this module, the participant will:


• Receive a refresher on the 12 Steps of the Breakthrough
Strategy
• Understand how the 12 Steps of the Breakthrough
Strategy provide the backbone for six sigma DMAIC
projects
• Know the linkage of six sigma tools to the Breakthrough
Strategy
• Understand the linkages of tools to each other

© 2001 ConceptFlow 11
Goals Of Six Sigma

LSL USL LSL USL

Defects Defects

Client target Client target

Eliminate Defects Center Process on Target


Reduce Variation Reduce Variation
LSL USL

GOAL
Client target

Meet Client Target


and Specifications

© 2001 ConceptFlow 12
The Breakthrough Strategy

Purpose Phase Step


1 Select CTQ characteristic
Recognize Phase 2 Define performance standards
Define Phase 3 Validate measurement system
Characterization Measure Phase
Analyze Phase 4 Establish product capability
5 Define performance objectives
6 Identify variation sources

7 Screen potential causes


Improve Phase 8 Discover variable relationship
Control Phase 9 Establish operating tolerances
Optimization
Integrate Phase
Sustain Phase 10 Validate measurement system
11 Determine process capability
12 Implement process controls

© 2001 ConceptFlow 13
Benefits of Following the 12 Steps

• Logical and proven method for achieving success


• “Would you want to give a baseline DPMO (step 4) if you did not
trust your data (step 3)?”
• “Would you put 6 months into fixing a client’s problem and then not
bother to control it to assure ongoing value (step 12)?”
• Provides a roadmap for BB activities
• Prevents “jumping to conclusions” and “firefighting”
• Forces data to be evaluated before used
• Provides a framework upon for analytical and statistical
tools

© 2001 ConceptFlow 14
Overall Problem Solving Approach

Measure Analyze

Practical Problem Statistical Problem

y = f ( x1 , x2 ,..., xk )

Practical Solution Statistical Solution

Control Improve

© 2001 ConceptFlow 15
Dynamics Of Execution Strategy - The
Funnel Effect

30-50 Inputs (X)


Define Phase

Measure Phase 10-15 Xs

Analyze Phase 8-10 KPIVs

Improve Phase 4-8 Key KPIVs

Control Phase 3-6 Key KPIVs

Optimized Process
© 2001 ConceptFlow 16
Road Maps

© 2001 ConceptFlow 17
Breakthrough Strategy (DMAIC)
Step Focus
Define the Project, the Customers and the ‘Big ‘Y’? Y
D efine 0

1 Select Product or Process Key Characteristic(s); e.g..., ’Little’ y y

M easure 2 Define Performance Standards For y y

3 Validate Measurement System for y y

y
4 Establish Process Capability of Creating y
Phase

y
A nalyze 5 Define Improvement Objectives For y

Identify Variation Sources In y x1, x2, ... xn


6

7 Screen Potential Causes For Change In y & Identify Vital Few xi x1, x2, ... xn

I mprove 8 Discover Variable Relationships Between Vital Few xi Vital Few x i

9 Establish Operating Tolerances On Vital Few xi Vital Few x i

10 Validate Measurement System For xi Vital Few x i

Vital Few x i
C ontrol 11 Determine Ability To Control Vital Few xi

12 Vital Few x i
Implement Process Control System On Vital Few xi
© 2001 ConceptFlow
Colors reflect training week
Define / Measure
 Identify the 'y' or 'y's'
as the focus of your
project (KPOV)
 Problem Statement
 KPOVs (y's)  Availability of
 Goals, Objectives
 Validate Resources
 Big Picture Big "Y"  Project Metrics  Charter
Performance  BB/Team
 CT Trees for Little "y" or  Project Schedule,
Data Training Needs
- CTC y's Delivery Milestones,
 Capable  Barriers
- CTQ  Performance Resources (Project
Measurement  Schedule
- CTD Standards Plan)
System on y's  Budget
 Little "y"  Gap Analysis  Team Members,
 Data Collection /
Process Owner
Sampling Plan
 Business Impact

2. 3.
1. Create Phase
Wk 1 Define Validate
Select CTQ Project Gate
Performance Measurement
Characteristics Definition Reviews
Standards System

Process Map  Process Owner


 Customer(s)  Metric Definition  Process Owner/ 
Operational  Project Team
 Customer  Scope Stakeholders 
Definition(s)  Champion Approval
Requirement  CTSs  Business
Measurement  BB
s (VOC)  High-Level Objectives 
System  MBB Approval
Process Map  Gap Analysis
Evaluation  Establish Business Support
(SIPOC)  Scope (initial)
Calibration  (Viability)
 Process  Communication 
 Project Tracking
Knowledge w/ BB, MBB,
 Documentation
Champion

© 2001 ConceptFlow 19
Define/Measure Tool Linkage
Voice Of the Client
CT Tree
Critical to Satisfaction

Quality Cost
Delivery CTC
CTQ
CTD

CTQ CTC
CTQ CTQ CTD CTC CTC
CTD CTD

Requirements Requirements

S I P O C
Suppliers Inputs Process Outputs Clients
Input Boundary Output Boundary

Detailed Process Map Ÿ Correct


Ÿ Authorized Travel Traveler Billing
Ÿ Auth. Code Ÿ Agency Request Ÿ Correct Traveler
Info Into
Ÿ Travel Request Entered Information Ÿ Updated
System
Profile

X Y
N
Complete Complete Traveler Gather
Need For Contact Information Auth.
Travel Request Travel Information Customer
Travel Agency Correct Code? Y
Form Authorization Verification Billing Info

Ÿ Request Form, S Ÿ Contact Service, S Ÿ Traveler Info, S Ÿ Client name, S


Ÿ Rationale, N Ÿ Authorization Ÿ Phone/Web Ÿ Company Info, S Ÿ Location, S
Ÿ Charge No., S
Ÿ Viable Alternatives, N Ÿ Form, S Ÿ Travel Information,S Ÿ Restrictions if applicable, S Ÿ Auth. Code, S
Traveler N
Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Domestic Ÿ Traveler/Designee, N Ÿ Preferences, S (seat, class) Ÿ Operator, S
ŸLocation
Ÿ Destination Ÿ International Ÿ Agency Resources Ÿ Agent N Ÿ Agent N
Variation, N
Customer,N Ÿ Traveler Ÿ day time, SN Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Traveler N
Ÿ Computer
Ÿ Approver Ÿ after hours, SN Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Computer Systems, N
Systems, N
Ÿ Website, S Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Measurement Systems, S Ÿ Measurement
Ÿ Other Personnel?
Ÿ Travel Budget C Ÿ Measurement Systems, N
Ÿ Form Procedure
Ÿ Cost Estimate S Systems, S
S
Ÿ Computer Ÿ Time In Queue
Ÿ Travel
Systems,N Ÿ Time in VRU
Information N Ÿ Location Ÿ Call Volume
Variation,N Ÿ Peak Hours
© 2001 ConceptFlow 20
Measurement Systems Analysis

All
Measurement
Systems Data type
?
Observational
MSA
Variable MSA
Resolution? Attribute
MSA
Gage name:

OK
Date of study:
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Response Reported by:
Tolerance:
Misc:

Components of Variation By Part

Accuracy/Bias? 200
%Contribution
%Study Var
%Tolerance
1.1
1.0
0.9

Percent
0.8

Appraiser vsStandard 100 0.7

OK 0
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part
0.6
0.5
0.4
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

100
Linearity?
R Chart by Operator By Operator
[ , ] 95. %CI 0.15 1 2 3
UCL=0.1252
1.1
1.0

Sample Range
P rcent 0.10 0.9
0.8

OK
0.7
0.05
90 R=0.03833 0.6
0.5
0.00 LCL=0 0.4
0 Operator 1 2 3
Percent

Stability? 80 1.1
1.0
Xbar Chart by Operator
1 2 3 1.1
1.0
Operator*Part Interaction
Operator
1
2

Sample Mean
0.9 UCL=0.8796 0.9
Mean=0.8075 3

Average
0.8

OK
LCL=0.7354 0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
70 0.4
0.3 0.4
0 Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Precision ?
60
Bob Sue Tom
Appraiser

© 2001 ConceptFlow 21
Analyze

 Histogram on y  Revised Project


 "Low hanging
 Baseline Control Definition
Fruit"  Identify Potential  Availability of
Chart or Metric Graph  Process Metrics
 Identify Major Critical Xs and Resources
over time  Quantified
Sources of Improvement  BB/Team
 Baseline Capability Project
Variation Opportunities Training Needs
 Voice of Process Objectives
 Potential KPIVs  Ranked  Barriers
 Zst, Cpk, DPMO,  Defect definition
 Data collection importance of  Schedule
COPQ, RTY  Validated
on KPIV's KPIV's  Budget
 Pareto types of defects Financial Goals

5. 6. 6.
4.
Define Identify Identify Phase
Establish
Performance Variation Wk 2 Variation Gate
Process
Objectives Sources Sources Review
Capability
(final) (Subjective) (Statistical)

 Define
 Baseline  Current Control Plan
Rational  Active and/or Passive  BB
Performance  Detail Process Map Data Collection /
Subgroups  MBB
 Benchmarking  Brainstorming Sampling Plans
 Active data  Process Owner
/ Competitive  Fishbone/CE FMEA  Graphical Techniques
collection  Champion
Analysis  MistakeProofing  Multi-Var
 Valid Data  Fin. Analyst
 VOC (specs)  SPC (Ys & Xs)  ANOVA  Validate Business
 SOP's  Variance Components Support
 Laws of Nature  Hypothesis Testing  Project Tracking
 Process Knowledge  Correlation  Maj. Stakeholder
 Regression  Documentation

© 2001 ConceptFlow 22
What Is a Control Chart?

Statistical control limits at +/- 3 standard deviations from mean

I and MR Chart
70
UCL=66.49
Individual Value

60 Region of
50 Mean=50.06 non random
40 variation
LCL=33.63
30
Subgroup 0 50 100

1
20 UCL=20.19
Region of
Moving Range

10 random
R=6.179
R = 13 . variation
0 LCL=0

LCL = 0

Patterns within the “Region of random variation” can also indicate non-randomness

© 2001 ConceptFlow 23
Control Chart Selection Process

Characteristic
Selected

Variable Data Yes Variable No


Discrete or Attribute Data
Data?

No Constant No
No Rational Yes Proportions Counts sample size u Chart
Subgroup

Yes Yes

Individuals Subgroup No Average Chart Constant No


sample size p Chart c or u Chart
Chart (I-MR) size > 9 (Xbar-R)

Yes Yes

Ability to calculate s No
np or p Chart
for each subgroup

Yes

Average Chart
(Xbar-s)

© 2001 ConceptFlow 24
Process Capability
Eliminate
out of
No
Process Start
control Stable? Characteristic
situation Selected
Control Chart
Yes

Variable Data Data Discrete or Attribute Data


Type?

Summary
Statistics Summary Alternate

Statistics
Poisson
Binomial Attribute
Type?
Data normal?
No Convert
Descriptive Statistics to ppm
Histogram Capability Capability
Normality Plot
Analysis Analysis
Capability (Binomial) (Poisson)
Transform
Analysis Process Z DPU
data Calculate
(Normal)
Box-Cox Transformation Cp, Cpk Sigma
DPMO/ppm
Z Z Table

© 2001 ConceptFlow 25
The Standard Normal Curve

The standard normal curve is a special case of the normal distribution


where the mean = 0 and the standard deviation = 1
Theoretical Empirical
68.26% …………………….60-75%

95.44% …………………….90-98%

99.73% …………………….99-100%

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

95% of the population is within approximately ± 2 standard deviations


or Z-scores of the mean
© 2001 ConceptFlow 26
Z Transformations

Mean Point of
Interest

Z=3 Z=
( X − µ)
σ
1σ 2σ 3σ

© 2001 ConceptFlow 27
Transforming a Data Distribution to a
Standard Normal Curve

σ
95% of the
observations will
fall within ± 2
standard
deviations

60 70 80 90 100 110 120


D ays

-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7
1

Z-Scale

Area under curve can be used to estimate the


probability of an “event” occurring

© 2001 ConceptFlow 28
Z-Score Relationship to Six Sigma®
Philosophy
A six sigma process would have six standard deviations between the
mean and both spec limits for a short term capability study

LSL USL
1σ st

6σ s What is the
minimum number
t
of Z’s between
the spec limits
and the mean?

60 70 80 90 100 110 120


D a ys

-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7
1

Z-Scale

© 2001 ConceptFlow 29
Long-Term Versus Short-Term Sigma

ZLT = ZST – 1.5


USL
ZST is used to
rate
performance
over the short-
term 1.5
σ
Acceptable

ZLT estimates
ZLT PPM or
DPMO over
ZST the long-term

© 2001 ConceptFlow 30
Defects Per Million Opportunities (DPMO)

Number of Defects D
= DPU =
Total Units U

Total Defects x 1,000,000


DPMO =
Total Units x Total Opportunities Per Unit

Defects x 1,000,000 D x 1,000,000


DPMO = =
Total Opportunities TOP

DPMO = DPO x 1,000,000

© 2001 ConceptFlow 31
Hidden Factory

Final Yield, FY = U/S = Units Passed/Units Submitted

S U
Operation Verify Product

Hidden Factory:
Rework
Defects and
Rework

Scrap

Classic Yield Ignores Role of “Hidden Factory”


© 2001 ConceptFlow 32
Throughput Yield Exercise

• Calculate the TPY for Process Steps 2 and 3


• Calculate the FY for each step and compare

10 Rework 10 Rework 10 Rework

100
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 70 Units
Units

10 units 10 units 10 units


lost as lost as lost as
scrap scrap scrap

© 2001 ConceptFlow 33
C&E Matrix Construction
Detailed Process Map
Voice Of the Client
Ÿ Correct
Ÿ Authorized Travel Traveler Billing
Ÿ Auth. Code Ÿ Agency Request Ÿ Correct Traveler
Info Into
Ÿ Travel Request Entered Information Ÿ Updated
System
Profile

X Y
N
Complete Complete Traveler Gather
Need For Contact Information Auth.
Travel Request Travel Information Customer
Travel Agency Correct Code? Y
Form Authorization Verification Billing Info

Ÿ Request Form, S Ÿ Contact Service, S Ÿ Traveler Info, S Ÿ Client name, S


Ÿ Rationale, N Ÿ Authorization Ÿ Phone/Web Ÿ Company Info, S Ÿ Location, S
Ÿ Charge No., S
Ÿ Viable Alternatives, N Ÿ Form, S Ÿ Travel Information,S Ÿ Restrictions if applicable, S Ÿ Auth. Code, S
Traveler N
Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Domestic Ÿ Traveler/Designee, N Ÿ Preferences, S (seat, class) Ÿ Operator, S
ŸLocation
Ÿ Destination Ÿ International Ÿ Agency Resources Ÿ Agent N Ÿ Agent N
Variation, N
Customer,N Ÿ Traveler Ÿ day time, SN Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Traveler N
Ÿ Computer
Ÿ Approver Ÿ after hours, SN Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Computer Systems, N
Systems, N
Ÿ Website, S Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Measurement Systems, S Ÿ Measurement
Ÿ Other Personnel?
Ÿ Travel Budget C Ÿ Measurement Systems, N
Ÿ Form Procedure

Cause and Effect Matrix


Ÿ Cost Estimate S Systems, S
S
Ÿ Computer Ÿ Time In Queue
Ÿ Travel
Systems,N Ÿ Time in VRU
Information N Ÿ Location Ÿ Call Volume
Variation,N Ÿ Peak Hours

Rating of
Importance to
Client
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Scop Process
ing Outputs

Process
Inputs Total
KPIV
Identi
ficatio 1
n 2
3
4
5
Team Ratings
6
MEASUREMENTS MATERIALS PEOPLE 7
Freq of Training
Co. Profiles
Updates
Times
sys

inte

Self

Time Zones
te

Traveler Profiles
r ne
Qu

Pro

ms
eue

t
add

Cre
ces

em

Comp Downtime Resources/Shift


res

dit
ail
s

Computer Prog Experience Level


s

car

PO Damage
d

Delivery
Defects
PO Damage
Zabar Volume Call Routings
Maintenance
Call Volume Postal Service
Phone Service
Servers
y ida
Da e of

Ticket Types
l
Ho
Tim

es

Terminals
T-1
y

Lin

Carrier Updates

ENVIRONMENT MACHINES METHODS

© 2001 ConceptFlow 34
C&E Matrix Scoring

Cause and Effect Matrix


Rating of
Importance to
Client
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Process
Outputs

Process
Inputs Total

1
2
3
4
5
6 C&E Matrix, Pareto of Customer Requirements
7
As They Relate To The Process
7000

6000

5000

Count
4000

3000

2000

1000

Rank and display on 0


ll ti
me
)
a ry on ck
et
a li
sm
ue ner file ctti f Ti io n ous

Pareto Chart
ca s g rte
que s( ce
s t/Iti P ro nsa eo are illi n s-s ou ers
Defect e i n
r oc e s
e so u r
ct
Tic k e
ve le r
e r Tr a
y T i m
w e st F
o rp B
Pr o fe
e : C
Oth
Ti m to P R
rre Tra alls
P
li ve
r Lo C
vi c
e
erv
ic
m e C o C D e e r S
Ti S

© 2001 ConceptFlow 35
FMEA Construction

C&E Matrix, Pareto of Customer Requirements


As They Relate To The Process Detailed Process Map Ÿ Correct
Ÿ Authorized Travel Traveler Billing
7000 Ÿ Auth. Code Ÿ Agency Request Ÿ Correct Traveler
Info Into
Ÿ Travel Request Entered Information Ÿ Updated
System
Profile

X Y
6000 N
Complete Complete Traveler Gather
Need For Contact Information Auth.
Travel Request Travel Information Customer
5000 Travel
Form Authorization
Agency
Verification
Correct
Billing Info
Code? Y
Count

4000 Ÿ Request Form, S


Ÿ Authorization
Ÿ Contact Service, S Ÿ Traveler Info, S Ÿ Client name, S
Ÿ Rationale, N Ÿ Charge No., S Ÿ Phone/Web Ÿ Company Info, S Ÿ Location, S
Ÿ Viable Alternatives, N Ÿ Form, S Ÿ Travel Information,S Ÿ Restrictions if applicable, S Ÿ Auth. Code, S
Traveler N
3000 Ÿ Traveler N ŸLocation
Ÿ Domestic Ÿ Traveler/Designee, N Ÿ Preferences, S (seat, class) Ÿ Operator, S
Ÿ Destination Ÿ International Ÿ Agency Resources Ÿ Agent N Ÿ Agent N
Variation, N
Ÿ Traveler
2000 Customer,N Ÿ Computer
Ÿ Approver
Ÿ day time, SN Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Traveler N
Systems, N Ÿ after hours, SN Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Computer Systems, N
Ÿ Website, S Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Measurement Systems, S Ÿ Measurement
Ÿ Other Personnel?
1000 Ÿ Form Procedure
Ÿ Travel Budget C Ÿ Measurement Systems, N
Ÿ Cost Estimate S Systems, S
S
Ÿ Computer
0 )
Ÿ Travel
Systems,N
Ÿ Time In Queue
me et sm Information N Ÿ Time in VRU
ry ion
e ll ti era ctt ick ali ou
s Ÿ Location Ÿ Call Volume
eu ( ca es Itin rofi
le
sa fT res li n
g ion rte
qu e ss urc et/ rP ran eo Fa Bil s-s ou ers Variation,N Ÿ Peak Hours
Defect e in Proc e so t Tick v e le e rT
ry
Tim west o rp Profe e :C Oth
Tim R
rr e
c Tra lls
P
li ve Lo C
ice rvic
e to o C a e rv S e
Tim C D Se

© 2001 ConceptFlow 36
FMEA Construction (continued)

MEASUREMENTS MATERIALS PEOPLE


Freq of Training
Co. Profiles
Updates
Times

sys

inte

Self
Time Zones

tem
Traveler Profiles

rne
Qu

Pro
eue

t
add

Cre
ces

em
Comp Downtime Resources/Shift

res

d
a
s

it c
il
Computer Prog Experience Level

ar d
PO Damage
Delivery
Defects
PO Damage
Zabar Volume Call Routings
Maintenance
Call Volume Postal Service
Phone Service
Servers
y id a
Da e of

Ticket Types
l
Ho
Tim

es
T-1 Terminals
y

Lin Carrier Updates

ENVIRONMENT MACHINES METHODS

© 2001 ConceptFlow 37
RPN on Pareto Chart

© 2001 ConceptFlow 38
Initial Control Plans

MSA Gage name:


Date of study:
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Response Reported by:
Tolerance:
Misc:

Components of Variation By Part


200 1.1
%Contribution 1.0
%Study Var 0.9
%Tolerance

Percent
0.8
100 0.7
0.6
0.5

Detailed Process Map


0 0.4
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

R Chart by Operator By Operator


0.15 1.1
Process Capability Analysis for Distance
1 2 3
UCL=0.1252 1.0

Sample Range
0.10 0.9
0.8
Ÿ Correct 0.05
0.7
R=0.03833 0.6
Traveler Billing
Agency Request Ÿ Correct Traveler LSL USL
0.5
Info Into Process Data
0.00 LCL=0 0.4
Entered Information Ÿ Updated 0 Operator 1 2 3
System USL 12.0000
Profile Xbar Chart by Operator
Within Operator*Part Interaction
1.1 1 2 3 1.1 Operator
Target * 1
Traveler Gather 1.0 1.0
Information 2

Sample Mean
Contact LSL 10.0000
0.9
Overall
UCL=0.8796 0.9
Information Customer

Average
0.8 Mean=0.8075 3

FMEA
LCL=0.7354 0.8
Agency Correct Mean 9.8614
0.7
0.7
Verification Billing Info 0.6
0.5
0.6

Sample N 125 0.4 0.5


0.4
0.3
Contact Service, S Ÿ Traveler Info, S Ÿ Client name, S StDev (Within) 0.328760 0 Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Phone/Web Ÿ Company Info, S Ÿ Location, S StDev (Overall) 0.490139


Travel Information,S Ÿ Restrictions if applicable, S Ÿ Auth. Code, S
Traveler/Designee, N Ÿ Preferences, S (seat, class) Ÿ Operator, S
Agency Resources Ÿ Agent N Ÿ Agent N Potential (Within) Capability
day time, SN Ÿ Traveler N Ÿ Traveler N Cp 1.01
after hours, SN Ÿ Computer Systems, N Ÿ Computer Systems, N CPU 2.17
Computer Systems, N Ÿ Measurement Systems, S Ÿ Measurement CPL -0.14
Measurement Systems, N Cpk -0.14
Systems, S
Time In Queue 8 9 10 11 12
Cpm *
Time in VRU
Call Volume Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance
Peak Hours Pp 0.68 PPM < LSL 576000.00 PPM < LSL 663368.77 PPM < LSL 611349.22
PPU 1.45 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 6.41
PPL -0.09 PPM Total 576000.00 PPM Total 663368.77 PPM Total 611355.63
Ppk -0.09

Core Team: Date (Orig):

Date (Rev):

Process Current
Cpk /
Spec Measure Control
Process Date %R&R or Reaction
Input Output (LSL, ment Method Who Where When
Step (Sample P/T Plan
USL, System (from
Size)
Target) FMEA)

© 2001 ConceptFlow 39
Data Collection Plan
What to Defect Type of Type of Operation Data Sampling
Measure Definition Measure Data Definition Collection Plan
form
Service Quality Professionalism, Courteous Output/Process Discrete Continuous Ordinal scale 1-5 where 1 = did Survey form tracked by job number Internal audit by trained personnel;
not meet expectation, corporate accounts, 3 branches, 2
5 = exceeded expectation shifts, 10 operators within branch,
10 trials per operator at random

Service Delivery Time in queue, Time to process Output/Process Continuous for times collected; Queue = answering service to Time study form for auditors; time in Time in queue and time to process
Time to deliver itinerary/ticket discrete counts for defects agent pick up queue and time to process collected by auditors above;
Process time = agent pick up to Internal time stamps on collection estimated collection is One Week
Delivery error:
end call form by job number; time stamped for to determine baseline
• Agent error
E-ticket Itinerary: end call to pick up
• Profile error
message sent
• Mail error
Ticket mailed: end call to FedEx
pickup

• Build Data Collection Plan based on:


• SIPOC
• Process Maps
• C&E Matrix
• FMEA
• Sampling strategy
© 2001 ConceptFlow 40
Basic Descriptive Statistics

© 2001 ConceptFlow 41
Graphical Analysis

Pareto Chart
Pareto Chart for Defects Box Plots
100
400

80
300

Percent
60
Count

200
40

100
20

0 0
s e to ry
d res ax
ID
rro
r
rad his rs
Defect Ad gT d eE gT lete the
ong ron sin p O
Wr W Tra Mis om
Inc
Count 274 59 43 19 10 18
Percent 64.8 13.9 10.2 4.5 2.4 4.3
Cum % 64.8 78.7 88.9 93.4 95.7 100.0

Run Chart Scatter Plot Histogram

© 2001 ConceptFlow 42
More Graphical Analysis
Normal Probability
Main Effects Plot

Interaction Plot Multi-Vari Chart

© 2001 ConceptFlow 43
Hypothesis Testing Roadmap
In general:
START
• If P > 0.05, then fail to reject HO
• If P < 0.05, then reject HO Attribute Contingency Table
Variable or
• Ensure the correct sample size is taken Attribute
1 or 2 2 HO : FA Independent FB
Factors? Factors HA : FA Dependent FB
Data? 2
Stat > Tables > Chi Test
1
H O : Data is normal Variable Factor
H A : Data is not normal 1-Proportion Test
HO : P1 = Pt
Stat > Basic Stat > Normality Test or 1 Factor 1, 2 or more 1 Sample HA: P1 ≠ Pt
Levene’s Test Stat > Basic Stat > Descriptive Statistics 1 or >1 Levels? 1 level
Factors? t = target
(graphical summary) to test Stat > Basic Stat >
H O : σ 1 = σ 2 = σ 3 ...
H A : σ i ≠ σ j for i ≠ j
Assumption that sample size is sufficient
2 or more 1-Proportion
(or at least one is different)
Factors
Stat > ANOVA > 2-Proportion Test
Test for Equal Variance
(If the Null Hyp is rejected,
2 or 1, 2 or more Is data 2 Samples HO : P1 = P2
more levels? Data Not normal? Design of 2 levels to test HA : P1 ≠ P2
use 2 sample T test) levels
Normal Experiment Stat > Basic Stat >
2-Proportion
Fail to reject HO
1 level
Bartlett's Test
*Data is * basichypothesis tests H O : σ 1 = σ 2 = σ 3 ...
Test for Test for Std.Dev.
2 levels or Normal are robust to reasonable
H A : σ i ≠ σ j for i ≠
j
median or (or at least one is different)
> 2 levels? Test Std.Dev.? departures from Stat > ANOVA > Test for Equal Variance
Medians normality If sigmas are NOT equal, reduce data to determine which is different
2 levels only Test for Std.Dev.
Test for Test for means
1, 2 or >2 More than
mean or
Mann-Whitney Test 2
levels? 2 levels Std.Dev.?
Chi Test 1-Way ANOVA
H O: M 1 = M 2
HO: σ 1 = σ t (assumes equality of
H A: M 1 ≠ M 2
H A: σ 1 ≠ σ t 1 variances)
Stat > Non-parametric > t = target level HO : µ 1 = µ 2 = µ 3 ...
Mann-Whitney Stat > Basic HA : µ i ≠ µ j for i≠ j
Stat > Display Desc > Test for
2 levels Test for Is Data (or at least one is different)
Graphical Summary mean or
Mood’s Median Test Dependent? Stat > ANOVA > 1-Way
(if target sigma falls
Std.Dev.? means
(used with outliers) between CI, then fail to (select stacked or
H O : M 1 = M 2 = Mj 3 ... reject H O ) Test for unstacked data)
Test for
H A : M i ≠ M for i ≠ j mean or No, Data is
Std.Dev.? means
(or at least one is different)
drawn
2 or Stat > Non-parametric > Test for independently
more 1-Sample Wilcoxon
Mood's test
Test for Std.Dev. from 2 Yes, Data
levels or
1-Sample Sign Std.Dev. populations is Paired
Kruskal-Wallis Test HO: M 1 = M t
(assumes no outliers) H A: M 1 ≠ M t
H O : M 1 = M 2 = M 3 ... t = target Chi Test
2 1-Sample F Test 2-Sample t Test Paired t Test
H A : M i≠ M j for i ≠ j Stat > Non-parametric > HO: σ 1 = σ t
t Test HO: σ 1 = σ 2 H O: µ 1 = µ 2 HO: µ 1 = µ 2
(or at least one is different) HA: σ 1 ≠ σ 2 H A : µ 1≠ µ HA : µ 1 ≠ µ
and either 1-Sample H A: σ 1 ≠ σ t 2 2
Stat > Non-parametric > Sign or 1-Sample t = target HO: µ 1 = µ t Stat > Basic Stat > Stat > Basic Stat >
Kruskal-Wallis Wilcoxon HA : µ 1≠ µ Stat > ANOVA >
Stat > Basic t 2-Sample t Paired t
t = target Test for Equal
Stat > Display Desc > (if sigmas are equal, use
Stat > Basic Stat > Variance
Graphical Summary pooled std dev to compare.
1-Sample t
(if target sigma falls If sigmas are unequal
between CI, then fail to compare means using
reject H O ) unpooled std dev)

© 2001 ConceptFlow 44
Process Flow Of A Hypothesis Test

Define the problem and state objectives

State a “Null Hypothesis” (Ho)

State the “Alternate Hypothesis” (Ha)

Establish significance level (α )

Collect sample data

Calculate test statistic and/or p-value

DECIDE:
What does the evidence suggest?
Reject Ho? or Fail to reject Ho?

© 2001 ConceptFlow 45
Goal is to Collect Variable Data

More powerful statistical techniques can be performed using variable


input and response data

Outputs (Y)
Attribute Variable
Proportion tests, T-tests, ANOVA,
Inputs Attribute Chi-Square DOE, Regression
(X)
Variable Discriminant Correlation, Multiple
Analysis, Logistic Regression
Regression

© 2001 ConceptFlow 46
Improve
 KPIVs  Implementation
 Identif y Relationships Buy-in
 Optim. Input Levels  Availability of
 Identif y Potential  Optimal
- y=f (x) Resources
Critical Xs and Robust
- s=g(x)  BB/Team
Improvement Settings f or
 Conf irmation Runs / Pilot Training Needs
Opportunities Xs with
 To-be process  Barriers
 Ranked importance Tolerances
 Alternative Solutions  Schedule
of KPIV's
 Budget

8.
7. 9.
Discover Variable Phase
Screen Establish
Wk 3 Relationship Gate
Potential Operating
y=f(x) Review
Causes Tolerances
s=g(x)

 Passive and/or  Active data


active data collection on KPIV's  Identif ied  BB
collection on & KPOV's Relationships  MBB
KPIV's & KPOV's  Multiple Regression  Optimum Input  Process Owner
 MSA on Xs  RSM Levels  Champion
 Correlation  Simulation  Conf idence  Financial Analyst
 Regression  Modeling Intervals  Project Tracking
 DOE (screening)  DOE (optimizing)  Cost/Benef it  Documentation
Analysis

© 2001 ConceptFlow 47
Improve Phase Roadmap
IMPROVE PHASE
Identifies and validates the
optimum operating conditions

MODELING
• Discover variable relationships
• What’s the best combination of the X’s (inputs) for
producing the best Y (output) to meet or exceed the CTQ
• Diagnose PIV performance and establish performance
objectives

DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS REGRESSION


• Historical or active data
(DOE) • Multiple or simple
• Simulation or physical

SELECT IMPROVEMENTS
• Identity alternative solutions
• Determine the optimum solution
• Cost benefit analysis

VALIDATE IMPROVEMENT
• Pilot test improvements
• Ensure that optimum inputs truly result in
desired output
• Update FMEA and process map
© 2001 ConceptFlow 48
Correlation Coefficient

90 100

80 90
70
80
60
70
Y

Y
50
60
40
50
30
r = +1.0 40 r = -1.0
20
10 20 30
10 20 30
X X
76
r = 0.0
75

74 No correlation
Y

73

72

71

10 20 30
X
© 2001 ConceptFlow 49
Regression Plot

Regression Plot
Sales = -4710.51 + 10.0720 Shelf Space

S = 87.2641 R-Sq = 95.7 % R-Sq(adj) = 95.3 %

2000

1500

Ybar
Y

1000

550 600 650


X
Xbar

© 2001 ConceptFlow 50
Correlation and Regression

• Correlation tells how much linear association exists between two


variables
• Regression provides an equation describing the nature of relationship

Correlations: Shelf Space, Sales


Pearson correlation of Shelf Space and Sales = 0.978
p-value = 0.000

Regression Analysis: Sales versus Shelf Space


The regression equation is Sales = - 4711 + 10.1 Shelf Space

© 2001 ConceptFlow 51
Improve Phase Roadmap

IMPROVE PHASE
Tests multiple variables at
different levels to screen,
characterize and optimize
process output

DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS
(DOE)
• Simulation or physical

FRACTIONAL FACTORIAL FULL FACTORIAL SIMPLE 2K GENERAL FULL FACTORIAL


• Tests multiple variables but not all • Testing many variables at 2 levels (high/low) • Tests multiple variables, at various levels
interactions; Not all levels, less • Screening, characterization, optimization • Characterization, optimization
experimentation require
• Screening

© 2001 ConceptFlow 52
Strategy of Experimentation

Planning Phase Execution Phase


1.Define the problem 9.Collect data
2.Set the objective 10.Analyze data
3.Select the response(s), Y’s 11.Validate results
4.Select the factors(s), X’s 12.Evaluate conclusions
5.Select the factor levels 13.Revise SOP’s
6.Select the DOE design 14.Train affected workforce
7.Determine sample size 15.Document results
8.Run the experiment 16.Consider next experiment

Manage resources; have a contingency plan; use statistical common


sense

© 2001 ConceptFlow 53
The ANOVA Results

The ANOVA Table shows which factors are significant. Regression


coefficients are listed.

© 2001 ConceptFlow 54
The Pareto of Standardized Effects

The Pareto Chart of effects shows the ranking of the variation identified
by each source. Note the “line of significance”

© 2001 ConceptFlow 55
Main Effects, Interactions and Cube Plots

By factor, low level


to high level

Parallel lines indicate


NO interaction

The response is plotted on


the orthogonal factor axis
© 2001 ConceptFlow 56
The Graph Results
Normality Plot and Histogram of
the residuals show the residuals
to be “normal”

Looking for random distributions


without a pattern. The residual vs. fits show slight widening,
but the widening here is not a concern.
Looking for strong outliers and patterns
© 2001 ConceptFlow that could indicate special cause. 57
Reducing Risk

Define the goal of the study


N

Y Can we
Define the characteristic restrict population
or property of interest of interest?

Define the population or process about N


which inferences are to be drawn
Can we
change accessible
data?
Define the environment or type Y
of data that you have access to

N
Evaluate relevance of planned
data for desired inferences, Risk
PROCEED
i.e., evaluate whether there is a “gap” OK?

© 2001 ConceptFlow 58
Cost / Benefit Studies

• Verify and validate benefits outweigh costs


• Consider ALL costs of implementation
• Determine ALL benefits
• expense
• time
• customer/employee satisfaction
• Safety
• Others

© 2001 ConceptFlow 59
Pilot

Pilot Purpose Pilot Execution


• Revise improvement before • Involve management –
implementation especially Process Owner
• Determine best • Carefully and thoroughly plan
implementation method pilot activities
• Lower failure risks • Use affected personnel – get
• Identify all implementation buy-in
costs/benefits • Use same measurement
• Confirm expected results system from “Measure” phase
• Obtain user feedback • Monitor results
• Obtain buy-in • Debrief
• Adjust full scale
implementation accordingly

Don’t shortcut – always do a pilot!


© 2001 ConceptFlow 60
Control
 Pilot Plan Results  Control Plan (x's
 Control Charts (x's & y 's)
 Lessons
& y 's)  Validate
Learned /
 Improv ed Capability Controlled
 Update Process Maps, Best
(LT) Process
CE, FMEA, Metrics Practices
 Improv ed  Sustained
 Pilot Plan / Run (Translate)
Benchmark (Zst, Perf ormance
 Validated  Communica
Cpk, DPMO)  Monitor Plan
Measurement Sy stem te Success
 Signif icance of  BB Audit Plan
Af ter Improv e (Xs &  Celebrate
Improv ement  Link to Customer
Ys) Team
(hy pothsis test) CTs
 Conf irmation of  Document
 Re-Calculate FMEA  Transition to
Changes (stat) Results
-RPN Process Owner

10. 11.
12.
Validate Determine Final Project Certification
Wk 4 Implement
Measurement Process Presentation/ &
Process
System & Capability Phase Gate Celebration
Control
Improvements (Ys and Xs)

 Document  Document-Ev idence


 Activ e data  Activ e data  ISO Document.
 Process Owner  Process Owner
collection collection  Ident'd KPIV
 Champion  Champion
 New Process Map  Current Control  SOPs, Train
 BB  BB
 Measurement Plan  Mistake Proof ing /
 MBB  MBB
Sy stem Ev aluation  SPC on Xs + Ys Error Proof ing
 Fin. Validation  Final Financial
 Calibration Study  SOP, Train  Accountability
 Proj. Tracking Validation (2 projects)
 Control Charts  VOC  Responsibility
Entry  Leadership courses
 Validation or Pilot  Capability  Finalize
 Replication ?  Proj. Tracking Entry
Run Planning Analy sis Transition to
Process Owner

© 2001 ConceptFlow 61
Ve
co rba

© 2001 ConceptFlow
co nsi l Ins
Pr ntro dere tru
oj c
ec l fo d ac tion
ts r S ce s
ix p –
Si tab No
g m le t
a

Least

Least
St
a
Pr n d
o c ar
ed d O
ur p
es era
SO (S tin
OP g
Ev ’ sP ’s)
alu w
at /Tr
io ain
n in
St g
a &
Co tis
nt tica
ro
l ( l Pr
SP o c
Po C ) es
(M a k s
ist Y -
Effort to Implement

ak o k
eP e
ro
Pr of
o in
Re c e s g)
-d s
es or
Control Effectiveness Most

Most

ig Pr
n od
uc
De t
sig
n
Fo
rS
ix
Si
gm
Employ the Control Method that ensures the Greatest

a
Process. Typically, a combination of several are required
Control with the Least Amount of On-Going Effort from the

62
Control Phase Roadmap

STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL

CONTROL PLAN AND REACTION PLAN

LONG TERM MSA PLAN

CHANGE CONTROL

TRAINING PLAN; STANDARDIZED


WORK; VISUAL WORK PLACE

5S AND MISTAKE PROOFING

INTEGRATE WITH QUALITY SYSTEM

SUSTAIN EXPECTATIONS
© 2001 ConceptFlow 63
Major Control Tools

Six Sigma Process Control Plan


Process Name: Prepared by: Page: of
Customer Int/Ext Approved by: Document No:

Location: Approved by: Revision Date:


Area: Approved by: Supercedes:

Specification/
Sub Process CTQ Specification Measurement Who Where Decision Rule/
Sub Process Requirement Sample Size Frequency SOP Reference
Step Characteristic Method Measures Recorded Corrective Action
KPOV KPIV USL LSL

1S
2
015
10
5S 2S
5
0

4S 3S
© 2001 ConceptFlow 64
Module Objectives

By the end of this module, the participant will:


• Receive a refresher on the 12 Steps of the Breakthrough
Strategy
• Understand how the 12 Steps of the Breakthrough
Strategy provide the backbone for six sigma DMAIC
projects
• Know the linkage of six sigma tools to the Breakthrough
Strategy
• Understand the linkages of tools to each other

© 2001 ConceptFlow 65
Exercise

© 2001 ConceptFlow 66
Exercise: Rapid Fire Catapult Launch
OBJECTIVE:
To fire the catapult and record the distance in inches for each of the launches.
The measured distance will be from the front of the launcher base to the point
where the ball hits the floor. Use a data sheet to record the distances in the
order in which they were obtained and who fired the catapult
Target is 60 inches; Spec limit is: LSL= 50, USL = 70
RULES
1.Every shot will be launched with the same catapult settings:
a Let it set as is
b. Stop angle = 130 degrees
2. Each member of the team will perform an equal number of launches (as near as possible).
A “launch” consists of loading, pulling back, and releasing. Do 5 each
3.There will be a time limit of 15 seconds between successive launches. Each group is to be
self policed with a penalty associated to late firings.
4. You must get plan approval before any launches
5. 5 practice shots MAXIMUM.

© 2001 ConceptFlow 67
 CTS Statement
Deliverables
 Process Flow Map
 Cause and effect for problem “missed target”
 Measurement System Analysis
 Run Chart, control chart
 Histogram, normal probability plot
 Tally Sheet for “missed target”
 Pareto, box plots
 Descriptive Statistics – Mean, Median, Std. Dev., Variance
 Confidence Interval for Mean and Std. Dev.
 Hypothesis test for means comparing operators, tables
 Capability Study
 Vary one factor, hold all other constant, take 10 shots and plot
correlation

© 2001 ConceptFlow 68
Trademarks and Service Marks

Six Sigma is a federally registered trademark of Motorola, Inc.


Breakthrough Strategy is a federally registered trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
ESSENTEQ is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
INTELLEQ is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
METREQ is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Weaving excellence into the fabric of business is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
FASTART is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Breakthrough Value Services is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Breakthrough Design is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Breakthrough Lean is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Breakthrough Six Sigma is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Design with the Power of Six Sigma is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Design for Six Sigma Software is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Design Six Sigma for Software is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
Legal Lean is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
SSA Navigator is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
SigmaCALC is a trademark of Six Sigma Academy.
SigmaFlow is a trademark of Compass Partners, Inc.
SigmaTRAC is a trademark of DuPont.
MINITAB is a trademark of Minitab, Inc.
VarTran is a trademark of Taylor Enterprises.