Just how original is Six Sigma?

• Print
• Comment Feed
• Stumble it
• Digg it
• del.icio.us
• Facebook

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/business-operations/quality-management-standards/OPS_QMA/577584-6922304

Noted quality expert Joseph M. Juran 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 colours. 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.”

My question is just how original is Six Sigma?

These are the responses:

Karen Wilhelm: Contributing Editor at The Association for Manufacturing Excellence

This was selected as the Best Answer

The name “six sigma” is about as pointless as the name “lean.” Both have become big umbrellas covering lots of related methods and

philosophies. Borrowing a term from the science of statistics that is understood by a relatively small population dresses up the experts in

costumes complete with belts. There’s a sort of elitism to it.

Then it’s applied as simple measurement of phenomena–size, time, features, quality standards–so people can figure out what things are

going wrong. Not that this is a bad idea, or that giving people new knowledge about how to analyze problems through data isn’t valuable.

Getting better and better control of processes is usually a great thing to be working on. And it’s not like advanced statistical analysis

of certain problems doesn’t require specially trained people to do regression analysis or chi squared or whatever.

Somehow we seem to need names for ideas and methods and we need to re-name them regularly and get new flags to wave. When people barge in

with a “new” thing, and everyone sees that it’s pretty much recycled from the past, they lose respect. If you’re honest and tell them

they’ve probably seen something similar in the past and that a new name has happened to get attached to it, they’ll have more confidence

that they have a head start on reviving a good idea that just didn’t take hold last time around.

Maybe we should have a contest to predict what the next moniker will be.

Jeff Williams: Director of IT Operations & Professional Services | Executive-level IT Business Strategist

All of it – from the early 70’s Zero Defect and 80’s Quality is Free programs to todays Six Sigma – can be tossed into a pot and boiled

down to reveal “common sense”.

It is amazing to me that we wildly consume so much hype and are forever reaching for the “magic bullet”. Is it that our short term focus

inhibits our ability to notice the long term gains of very, very simple measuring, managing and accounting processes.

I guess it is because of its rarity that Quality, like Leadership, can forever and continually be repackaged and sloganized into countless

books and seminars for reprocessing and profit.

Tomorrow will again bring someone who will no doubt pick up all the tired pieces of common sense and logic and create another model with a

new name. All those out there who are horribly busy with their heads down looking for lose change will stumble across it and lacking all

commonness to their senses will believe they’ve discovered enlightened wisdom from a great prophet and seek to employ the secret formula -

all without looking up.

After all – This is why we still today are marveled by what ancient Greeks and other civilizations created. Darwin had it backwards! We are

retreating rapidly from knowledge and wisdom. While we create new advances in science and such we are no more wiser. We simply rearrange

stuff to make new stuff from the old stuff. We are however much, much busier.

Donald Kalil: President & CEO at Kalil & Associates Contract Consulting

My father, a WWII vet, mechanic and a graduate of the third grade always used to say, “Do it right the first time, damn it!” And, “The

customer is always right!” That was in the 1950s and was my introduction into quality management and customer satisfaction at the age of

about 5 years—and is still the best advice I could ever give to anyone. Since then, zero defects, quality circles, TQM, Malcolm

Baldridge, ISO, six sigma, blah, blah, blah. It’s all Juran and Deming repackaged into a neater box with a prettier bow. The outcome,

however, is the same—”Do it right the first time, damn it! And, “The customer is always right!” There are a lot of people making a lot

money off of Dad’s two favorite phrases.

Martin Thomas: Expert in developing businesses; especially internationally or into new spaces, with complex stakeholder management.

Not very but it provides a good focus and hooks to hang the ideas on so people remember the principles being enacted. The math is iffy but

the high concept is good.

Daniel Bloom SPHR,SSBB,SCRP: HR Strategist with the knowledge and tools to improve your organization

I have just finished the regiment of study for my Black Belt and had prior exposure to Quality Circles. It is my understanding that the

term six sigma was coined by Motorola as a description of the goal they had for achieving the level of error free efforts on the part of

their organization. As a whole it is an evolution of TQM and QC that came before it was pushed into the everyday realm.

Tammy Hildreth: Partner at Network For Work, LLC

I think many of the Six Sigma concepts are common sense, and therefore not original. However, the use of objective measurements to qualify

and then to continually justify the drivers of the desired output does seem new to me. I like the tight coupling of customer goals to

decisions (via the constant focus on CTQ’s) throughout the project lifecycle. I also think that the MBF goes a step beyond the standard

dashboard by including an escalation path and specific accountability should an implemented change stop delivering the expected benefits at

some point in the future. To me, this last concept sets Six Sigma apart because it pays more than lip service to the idea of continuous

improvement. Using the MBF, if the X’s or Y’s that are measured by the MBF begin to regress, then a company has the process and the

accountable people at the ready to do something about it. Finally, the Six Sigma approach recognizes that variance is integral to all

processes, and that predictable, stable, long term outputs are only achieved through continuous vigilance and improvement.

Wallace Jackson: Multimedia Producer and i3D Programmer for Acrobat 3D PDF, JavaFX, Mobile & Virtual Worlds

Not original, but the refinement of quality into an artform is much needed these days.

Anshuman Tiwari: Change Management and Business Excellence Professional

Who are we to argue with Juran!

Motorola was using Dr. Juran’s quality improvement methods prior to developement of Six Sigma. Many argue that Bill Smith and team merged

statistical tools (far few in the early stages than now) with Juran’s method to create Six Sigma. No offence there…they did a fantastic

job. Unfortunately, Bill did not live long enough to see how Six Sigma flourished and also lay to rest this argument of originality. And

Dr. Juran was too modest and humble to lay any claim. Moreover, he is no more to settle this issue. So let it be.

Hisham Sabry: Lean Six Sigma MBB at HSBC, EKFC CEO,ITIL, ISO20K,Innovation Award,15 M U$ savings. Six Sigma Book Author,PMP

see all my answers

Best Answers in: Quality Management and Standards (2)

In fact, there is nothing original about six sigma. the concept of continous improvements and searching for a low defects products is

inherted in every one. Six Sigma however, have done what we have all been searching for, a structered methodology and a common language.

These two bottom lines are the main benifits of adopting Six Sigma. When all your organization are talking with the same language and

moving with the same methodolgy then bottomn line results will be easily achieved.

Nilakanta Srinivasan (Neil): Principal at Canopus Business Management Group

I have also seen Six Sigma as ‘how useful is it’ and the answer has been ‘to a great extent’.

Six Sigma is very good example of an ORIGINAL & innovative ‘Corporate Campaign’ to keep customers at the center and work everything around

them!

It has solved its purpose.

Gerry Sequeira: President, ICP International

The “new” is in how it’s adopted by an organization. If it’s about tools, methodology, and certification of belts, then it typically

becomes an exercise in training and little else. If, however, it’s about changing the way leadership and employees think and behave, then

it’s dramatically better because it provides a common framework for addressing problems and opportunities in the business. It also creates

a culture which minimizes the assumptions and presumptions commonly used to solve process problems.

Bruce Baron: Senior Marketing Leader and Strategy Consultant

Six sigma to me has several pieces that are old, new, red and blue. My experience has shown me that
1. The tools (statistical process control) is old, but focusing on a critical few, and supplying tools to help use them in an intentional

method (DMAIc, etc) is new.
2. The Method is old (PDCA, TQM, Common sense) is old, but the facilitation that easy to use tools to connect the dots is new(er).
3. The democratization of transformation is the real new aspect. Taking anyone in the organization that can do basic math, read a chart,

and allow them to apply scientific principles to identify issues, and then collaborate with a team to enact change (measurable change).

That is the real new thing to me. I have seen it re-energize whole organizations, and especially some people, who felt that they were

providing marginal value to the organization, those are the ones that SS can really make an impact on, they grab and run with projects.

So, in many ways Juran was right, SS is a very much a repackage, but he missed a big point. As information and intangibles become more the

products of the world, subject matter expertise will move away from the realms of physics and mathmatics and specialized knowledge

(engineering, even of the reliability type) and process improvement would need to become more democratized. So using it as a organizational

tool, where the enterprise improves the enterprise as a team, creates catalysts at every level, not limited to those with the right skills

making change happen to you. This has driven much of the success and interest in SS and similar programs.

I predict that SS will have a resurgence with the upcoming demographic changes, and the difference of attitudes i see in younger workers.

They insist on change, and organizations are going to need a way to make measureable, manageable, understandable, and fact based.

T Anand: Associate Vice President, HSBC India [Chartered Engineer - Certified Six-Sigma Black Belt]

The term “Six-Sigma” in itself is of course new and original, however the phenomenon of quality improvement and assurance is basic and

older concept.

This no ways downsizes Six-Sigma’s utility; it has been of great help all the time. The merit I see in this branding is “special attention”

and “facilitation to attain desired goals” (as stated by many members here).

Jag. A: Consultant on Business Excellence,Org. transformation,Six sigma, Process management/ improvement, Aluminium technologies

Juran is of course right that it is not original, but it is not important whether it original or not so long it works. Basically, it is

marrying of Juran Quality improvement methodology with rigorous Statistical techniques.
In fact, these statistical techniques (such as DOE ) have been used by Japanese auto. companies and others for example in the agricultural

field for many years before “invention” of Six Sigma. However, what has changed in the recent times is the availability of cost effective

Statistical packages like Mintitab which make using these techniques painless so that large number of people who are not Statisticians /

engineers can use them.

Motorola and others did a good job of packaging & branding it thus making it popular in many businesses.

What do you think? Is six sigma original or not? Leave a comment below.I recently posted the following question on Linked in Q&A:

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/business-operations/quality-management-standards/OPS_QMA/577584-6922304

Noted quality expert Joseph M. Juran 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 colours. 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.”

My question is just how original is Six Sigma?

These are the responses:

Karen Wilhelm: Contributing Editor at The Association for Manufacturing Excellence

This was selected as the Best Answer

The name “six sigma” is about as pointless as the name “lean.” Both have become big umbrellas covering lots of related methods and

philosophies. Borrowing a term from the science of statistics that is understood by a relatively small population dresses up the experts in

costumes complete with belts. There’s a sort of elitism to it.

Then it’s applied as simple measurement of phenomena–size, time, features, quality standards–so people can figure out what things are

going wrong. Not that this is a bad idea, or that giving people new knowledge about how to analyze problems through data isn’t valuable.

Getting better and better control of processes is usually a great thing to be working on. And it’s not like advanced statistical analysis

of certain problems doesn’t require specially trained people to do regression analysis or chi squared or whatever.

Somehow we seem to need names for ideas and methods and we need to re-name them regularly and get new flags to wave. When people barge in

with a “new” thing, and everyone sees that it’s pretty much recycled from the past, they lose respect. If you’re honest and tell them

they’ve probably seen something similar in the past and that a new name has happened to get attached to it, they’ll have more confidence

that they have a head start on reviving a good idea that just didn’t take hold last time around.

Maybe we should have a contest to predict what the next moniker will be.

Jeff Williams: Director of IT Operations & Professional Services | Executive-level IT Business Strategist

All of it – from the early 70’s Zero Defect and 80’s Quality is Free programs to todays Six Sigma – can be tossed into a pot and boiled

down to reveal “common sense”.

It is amazing to me that we wildly consume so much hype and are forever reaching for the “magic bullet”. Is it that our short term focus

inhibits our ability to notice the long term gains of very, very simple measuring, managing and accounting processes.

I guess it is because of its rarity that Quality, like Leadership, can forever and continually be repackaged and sloganized into countless

books and seminars for reprocessing and profit.

Tomorrow will again bring someone who will no doubt pick up all the tired pieces of common sense and logic and create another model with a

new name. All those out there who are horribly busy with their heads down looking for lose change will stumble across it and lacking all

commonness to their senses will believe they’ve discovered enlightened wisdom from a great prophet and seek to employ the secret formula -

all without looking up.

After all – This is why we still today are marveled by what ancient Greeks and other civilizations created. Darwin had it backwards! We are

retreating rapidly from knowledge and wisdom. While we create new advances in science and such we are no more wiser. We simply rearrange

stuff to make new stuff from the old stuff. We are however much, much busier.

Donald Kalil: President & CEO at Kalil & Associates Contract Consulting

My father, a WWII vet, mechanic and a graduate of the third grade always used to say, “Do it right the first time, damn it!” And, “The

customer is always right!” That was in the 1950s and was my introduction into quality management and customer satisfaction at the age of

about 5 years—and is still the best advice I could ever give to anyone. Since then, zero defects, quality circles, TQM, Malcolm

Baldridge, ISO, six sigma, blah, blah, blah. It’s all Juran and Deming repackaged into a neater box with a prettier bow. The outcome,

however, is the same—”Do it right the first time, damn it! And, “The customer is always right!” There are a lot of people making a lot

money off of Dad’s two favorite phrases.

Martin Thomas: Expert in developing businesses; especially internationally or into new spaces, with complex stakeholder management.

Not very but it provides a good focus and hooks to hang the ideas on so people remember the principles being enacted. The math is iffy but

the high concept is good.

Daniel Bloom SPHR,SSBB,SCRP: HR Strategist with the knowledge and tools to improve your organization

I have just finished the regiment of study for my Black Belt and had prior exposure to Quality Circles. It is my understanding that the

term six sigma was coined by Motorola as a description of the goal they had for achieving the level of error free efforts on the part of

their organization. As a whole it is an evolution of TQM and QC that came before it was pushed into the everyday realm.

Tammy Hildreth: Partner at Network For Work, LLC

I think many of the Six Sigma concepts are common sense, and therefore not original. However, the use of objective measurements to qualify

and then to continually justify the drivers of the desired output does seem new to me. I like the tight coupling of customer goals to

decisions (via the constant focus on CTQ’s) throughout the project lifecycle. I also think that the MBF goes a step beyond the standard

dashboard by including an escalation path and specific accountability should an implemented change stop delivering the expected benefits at

some point in the future. To me, this last concept sets Six Sigma apart because it pays more than lip service to the idea of continuous

improvement. Using the MBF, if the X’s or Y’s that are measured by the MBF begin to regress, then a company has the process and the

accountable people at the ready to do something about it. Finally, the Six Sigma approach recognizes that variance is integral to all

processes, and that predictable, stable, long term outputs are only achieved through continuous vigilance and improvement.

Wallace Jackson: Multimedia Producer and i3D Programmer for Acrobat 3D PDF, JavaFX, Mobile & Virtual Worlds

Not original, but the refinement of quality into an artform is much needed these days.

Anshuman Tiwari: Change Management and Business Excellence Professional

Who are we to argue with Juran!

Motorola was using Dr. Juran’s quality improvement methods prior to developement of Six Sigma. Many argue that Bill Smith and team merged

statistical tools (far few in the early stages than now) with Juran’s method to create Six Sigma. No offence there…they did a fantastic

job. Unfortunately, Bill did not live long enough to see how Six Sigma flourished and also lay to rest this argument of originality. And

Dr. Juran was too modest and humble to lay any claim. Moreover, he is no more to settle this issue. So let it be.

Hisham Sabry: Lean Six Sigma MBB at HSBC, EKFC CEO,ITIL, ISO20K,Innovation Award,15 M U$ savings. Six Sigma Book Author,PMP

see all my answers

Best Answers in: Quality Management and Standards (2)

In fact, there is nothing original about six sigma. the concept of continous improvements and searching for a low defects products is

inherted in every one. Six Sigma however, have done what we have all been searching for, a structered methodology and a common language.

These two bottom lines are the main benifits of adopting Six Sigma. When all your organization are talking with the same language and

moving with the same methodolgy then bottomn line results will be easily achieved.

Nilakanta Srinivasan (Neil): Principal at Canopus Business Management Group

I have also seen Six Sigma as ‘how useful is it’ and the answer has been ‘to a great extent’.

Six Sigma is very good example of an ORIGINAL & innovative ‘Corporate Campaign’ to keep customers at the center and work everything around

them!

It has solved its purpose.

Gerry Sequeira: President, ICP International

The “new” is in how it’s adopted by an organization. If it’s about tools, methodology, and certification of belts, then it typically

becomes an exercise in training and little else. If, however, it’s about changing the way leadership and employees think and behave, then

it’s dramatically better because it provides a common framework for addressing problems and opportunities in the business. It also creates

a culture which minimizes the assumptions and presumptions commonly used to solve process problems.

Bruce Baron: Senior Marketing Leader and Strategy Consultant

Six sigma to me has several pieces that are old, new, red and blue. My experience has shown me that

1. The tools (statistical process control) is old, but focusing on a critical few, and supplying tools to help use them in an intentional

method (DMAIc, etc) is new.

2. The Method is old (PDCA, TQM, Common sense) is old, but the facilitation that easy to use tools to connect the dots is new(er).

3. The democratization of transformation is the real new aspect. Taking anyone in the organization that can do basic math, read a chart,

and allow them to apply scientific principles to identify issues, and then collaborate with a team to enact change (measurable change).

That is the real new thing to me. I have seen it re-energize whole organizations, and especially some people, who felt that they were

providing marginal value to the organization, those are the ones that SS can really make an impact on, they grab and run with projects.

So, in many ways Juran was right, SS is a very much a repackage, but he missed a big point. As information and intangibles become more the

products of the world, subject matter expertise will move away from the realms of physics and mathmatics and specialized knowledge

(engineering, even of the reliability type) and process improvement would need to become more democratized. So using it as a organizational

tool, where the enterprise improves the enterprise as a team, creates catalysts at every level, not limited to those with the right skills

making change happen to you. This has driven much of the success and interest in SS and similar programs.

I predict that SS will have a resurgence with the upcoming demographic changes, and the difference of attitudes i see in younger workers.

They insist on change, and organizations are going to need a way to make measureable, manageable, understandable, and fact based.

T Anand: Associate Vice President, HSBC India [Chartered Engineer - Certified Six-Sigma Black Belt]

The term “Six-Sigma” in itself is of course new and original, however the phenomenon of quality improvement and assurance is basic and

older concept.

This no ways downsizes Six-Sigma’s utility; it has been of great help all the time. The merit I see in this branding is “special attention”

and “facilitation to attain desired goals” (as stated by many members here).

Jag. A: Consultant on Business Excellence,Org. transformation,Six sigma, Process management/ improvement, Aluminium technologies

Juran is of course right that it is not original, but it is not important whether it original or not so long it works. Basically, it is

marrying of Juran Quality improvement methodology with rigorous Statistical techniques.

In fact, these statistical techniques (such as DOE ) have been used by Japanese auto. companies and others for example in the agricultural

field for many years before “invention” of Six Sigma. However, what has changed in the recent times is the availability of cost effective

Statistical packages like Mintitab which make using these techniques painless so that large number of people who are not Statisticians /

engineers can use them.

Motorola and others did a good job of packaging & branding it thus making it popular in many businesses.

What do you think? Is six sigma original or not? Leave a comment below.

Readers who viewed this page, also viewed:

• ISO 9001 -v- six-sigma

Leave a Comment