Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/21/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Six Sigma methodology can be implemented in every industry. The structure followed five important phases - DMAIC, in which output of one phase is the input of next phase. It is a top driven approach and it needs commitment from top management for the successful implementation and desired results. Six Sigma professional insist on Z Score during measure phase even though there is well established process performances. Z Score tell us about errors within the system or in other words we can say that it tells us about the number of standard deviation present between the mean and specification limit. For any organisation it is very big challenge to define definition of defects as they have different processes and defects changes from process to process. for example in purchase it may be lead time failure, In fiance it may be vendor payment, in sales it may be not achieving sales target, on shop floor it may of not achieving quality objectives. Now the biggest challenge here to compare performance of all these processes as defects are defined in different units. Here comes Z score in picture which is common plateform that is used to compare performance of all processes and find out on which process we should work to improve it further. Higher the Z Score indicates that there are more number of standard deviations within specification limits and the mean value is far away from outlying limit. which means that majority of the results lies nearby average value and process is capable and stable both at the same time. Lower Z score indicates that there is less number of standard deviation present or there is presence of variance in output. and presence of variance indicates that product or service quality can change or fluctuate from its defined value which leads to dissatisfaction of customer. Z score helps a company to ensure the quality of its output and enables the organization to workout for the poor processes in case of any undesired result. Z Score is very useful and helps the six sigma professional to make comparison during measure and control phase to highlight where improvements can be made .
  2. 2 points
    An instance in which X significantly impacts Y but does not warrant changing X includes instances in which a manufacturer would have to compromise the integrity of their product for the sake of improving Y. For example, using copper wiring is significantly more costly to building a house than using aluminum wiring. However, the builder should not switch to aluminum because aluminum degrades significantly faster than copper and will demand more maintenance. Additionally, the interface of that aluminum with any non-aluminum wiring will create a voltage potential and possibly a fire hazard.
  3. 1 point
  4. 1 point
    PFMEA can be used in all areas of DMAIC. And DMAIC can be used in PFMEA.
  5. 1 point
    We use the RCA method in Analysis phase of DMAIC , Plan phase of PDCA & D4 step in 8D approach. What is RCA? _ Root cause analysis is a class of problem solving methods aimed at identifying the root causes of problems or event. To analyze a root cause, you have to define a problem, gather data or evidence. Identify the issue that contributed to the problem and find root cause using 5 Whys. Difference between Causes & Root causes _ Simply causes or probable causes can identify easily based on our experience or available data & it's superficial in nature. We can't implement a systematic action which ensures that the action taken on these causes will remove the problem permanently (not proactive - Meaning problem can reoccur) Whereas identification of Root causes is not comparatively easy as normal/probable causes. To identify it one must have to go on Gemba & validate the Scenario/issue/data by asking “why” several times until we reach the fundamental process element that failed. Once we identify & implement an action on these RCAs that remove problem permanently meaning no reoccurrence of problem. Also it always leads us to the Process , Control mechanism & system failure oriented RCAs. Below is the right approach to conduct the 3Way5Why RCA : 1. Generation oriented RCA (Why-why analysis) _ Which gives us the root cause for " Why the issue/problem has generated". It leads us to the Source of issue leading us to "Process or System failure" 2. Detection oriented RCA (Why-why analysis) _ In this mode of investigation we aim to Identify RCA for " Why our Process is not able to catch/detect the issues/problem from product or service throughout our process flow". This leads us towards the "Control Mechanism failure". 3. System oriented RCA (Why-why analysis) _ As the last step of our investigation, we must focus our attention on the systems that support our processes. Tracing back defects to the systems that may have contributed to the failure will help us improve systematically throughout the organization. This step is just as important as finding out why the product or service failed in the first place and may have more impact on the bottom line. Example of 3Way5Why : Problem / Issue _ Battery charger failure 1st Way : Occurrence / Generation 1st: Why did the battery charger fail? - It had a defective flex cable. 2nd: Why was the flex cable defective? -The traces at the edge of the overlay opening of the flex cable were cracked. 3rd: Why were they cracked? - Excessive force used while manually bending the flex cable during assembly. 4th: Why was the flex cable bent excessively? - No jig to assist the manual operation of bending. Root cause in this instance? Not using a poka yoke jig to assist in this manual operation will leave it exposed to variation in the force applied to assemble the product. 2nd Way : Detection 1st: Why was the defective flex cable not detected? - Invisible trace open in flex cable was not detected electrically. 2nd: Why was this not detected electrically? -FVT tester was not able to detect this failure. 3rd: Why did the FVT tester fail to detect? - FVT tester did not have the program to check for this failure. 4th: Why did the FVT tester not have this program? - The test program was consigned, and was not developed to check for this failure. Root cause in this instance? The test program buy-off procedure did not cover this item. This should be addressed. 3rd Way : System 1st: Why did our systems/processes produce a faulty product? - The flex cable has assembly issues which made it vulnerable to cracking. 2nd: Why were we not aware of this vulnerability? -The potential failure mode of cracked cables was not properly assessed. 3rd: Why was this failure mode not assessed? - FMEA was performed, but did not consider this failure mode. 4th: Why did we not consider this in FMEA? - No training program in place to train QE and ME in correct FMEA completion. Root cause in this instance? We need to make or FMEA system more robust with training and accountability.
  6. 1 point
    Benchmark Six Sigma Expert View by Venugopal R Any organization that deals with multiple product lines or services will have activities and expenses that are highly specific to the product lines or service verticals. There would also be many activities and expenses that are considered more in general and applies across the organization. Examples of such activities that are applicable across the organization are Administration, Infrastructure, Employee welfare related, Communication and IT, Energy consumption, Dealing with regulatory bodies and so on.. The method of costing that finds ways of allocating the ‘overhead’ expenses to functions, products or services is known as Activity Based Costing (ABC). Activity Based Costing will invoke more responsibility and cost consciousness within each function. Each function knows that they are being monitored for the share of ‘common’ expenditure related to them. From a Lean Six Sigma perspective, this helps in allocating 'base line costs' and 'post-project' cost benefits more specifically. For instance, there is an efficiency improvement project taken up by a testing laboratory within a factory, and one of the components of cost saving is the energy consumption. ABC will help to track whether there is reduction in energy consumption by the testing laboratory after the project is implemented. Another example could be a project where the ‘Learning & Development’ department brings out innovative training methods and one of the benefits is to reduce need for employees to travel from distant locations to attend training programs. If the ABC allocates the portion of travel costs associated with the training to Learning & Development department, the related savings associated to their project can be quantified objectively. While the ABC has many benefits, it does pose certain challenges as well. One example is where ABC is used to allocate the costs for a "Enterprise Business Excellence Program" to every function. Sometimes, when the Business Excellence team tries to drive certain initiatives, some functions may show resistance, since they become overtly cost conscious and may not even envision the long term organizational benefit due to such initiatives. This will require good conviction building to gain acceptance. Some organizations maintain the costs for such company-wide programs as part of the "corporate cost head", so that the individual functions cannot debate on such programs in the name of their P&L getting impacted. There could be certain expenses, where it would be practically difficult to do the ABC. For example, if an organization has multiple floors, it may be difficult to allocate the expenses for running and maintaining the elevators across functions, products or services! Overall, Activity Based Costing is a very useful methodology and may be applied with prudence as per the tolerance of the organization
  7. 1 point
  8. 1 point
    Advantages of ABC Analysis, For example we consider a company manufacturing, Product A & Product B. Product A, Production volume: 19,000 units Unit cost of direct materials and labor: ₹45 Product B, Production volume: 11,000 units Unit cost of direct materials and labor: ₹55 Manufacturing Overhead : Total manufacturing overhead costs: ₹30000 Factory supervisor salaries: ₹80000 Further, as product B is more complex to manufacture and needs more attention, the company decides the salaries of the supervisor should be allocated with ₹30,000 to product A and ₹50,000 to product B. Now if we use Full-costing allocation method, we get Total cost of production for Product A: ₹55 Total cost of production for Product A: ₹65 Using ABC method, Product A, Allocation of factory supervisors: ₹30000/19000 = ₹1.6 Manufacturing overhead to be applied to total production volume: ₹2,20,000/30,000 = ₹7.3 Unit cost of manufacturing overhead: ₹1.6 + ₹7.3 = ₹8.9 Total unit cost of production: ₹45 + ₹8.9 = ₹53.9 Product B, Allocation of factory supervisors: ₹50,000 /11,000 = ₹4.5 Manufacturing overhead to be applied to total production volume: ₹2,20,000/30,000 = ₹7.3 Unit cost of manufacturing overhead: ₹7.3 + ₹4.5 = ₹11.8 Total unit cost of production: ₹55 + ₹11.8 = ₹66.8 This proves that, ABC analysis shows that the total cost of production for product A is actually ₹53.9 per unit, not ₹55 as originally calculated. Product B costs ₹66.8 instead of the previous ₹65. These variations in prices of production have implications for profit forecasting, production planning and budget for marketing campaigns. Instances where ABC Analysis will create complications, When we take the above example with only one product or overheads are relatively small or no allocation done on supervisory salaries based on product's complexity, there is no need of ABC Analysis. When the product range is large, cost accumulation and data collection are complex and requires an advanced cost recording system and properly trained staffs. When it is difficult to assign cost to different activities.
  9. 1 point
    The data set follows a normal distribution and therefore can be characterized by the sample mean and standard distribution (S) with an associated confidence interval. The process outcomes will follow this characterized distribution. For example, future data sets of comparable quantity will have a mean in the range of the confidence interval.
  10. 1 point
    An airline has the normally distributed data of the price of jet fuel/barrel for each year of the past 20 years. The airline can use this data to anticipate how much jet fuel will cost for a specific time of year and adjust their ticket prices accordingly. They can also use this data to change their purchasing strategy on jet fuel futures as to beat the market.
  11. 1 point
    Assuming a standard normal distribution , you can use probability distributions to make predictions for outcomes of business processes by: calculating the area under the curve that does not meet the business limits - defining how far away from the limit the process is (Z value). With known X=0, sd=1, and a limit calculating the probability of the process not achieving or achieving the desired limits (DPMO) With known mean, sd, and limit with known Z value (item 1) can convert to DPMO with known DPMO (item 2) can convert to Z-value Using the information to establish the business case and support the charter of a DMAIC to ensure we exceed the business goals.
  12. 1 point
    Central Limit Theorem states that distribution of sample averages will tend towards a normal distribution as the sample size increases or in other words we can say that irrespective of shape of distribution of population , the distribution of average values of sample drawn from that population will tend toward a normal distribution as the sample size grows. Because of the CLT we can use average of small samples to evaluate any population using the normal distribution. We can see practical application during election . Any time when we see polling results on the news along with confidence interval, it gives an appeal to the central limit theorem.it tells us that larger the sample, better the approximation and this we can see from news channel to channel that sample sizes are different and results changes accordingly. from this we can guess how an election will turn out. We take a poll and find out that in our sample how much % of people would like to vote a candidate over another candidate. We have taken a small sample over a large population but as per Central Limit Theorem if we ran poll over and over again, the resulting guesses would be normally distributed or in other words we can say that we will have a clear picture around the large population and can guess about the winning candidate. So if we take large sample size and repeat again and again we will have a clear idea about the large population.
  13. 1 point
    Benchmark Six Sigma Expert View by Venugopal R Many of the tools used in Six Sigma project, where samples are used for analysis and decision making, apply the principle of Central Limit Theorem (CLT). As per the CLT, Sample means tend to follow normal distribution, irrespective to the population distribution, and hence the properties of Normal distribution apply for the sample means. The normality gets better with higher sample size. In today’s world with so many user-friendly statistical software, the analysis and even the choice of the tools to be applied, (for instance the type of test of hypothesis to be used for comparative analysis) could be left to the software. Hence the practical application of CLT would be happening inadvertently while using these tools. Control charts that use mean value of subgroups have their limits and rules based on the CLT. The significance tests where mean values of samples are compared, have the acceptance conditions based on CLT. If these tools had been used as part of the Six Sigma projects, the CLT has been put to use as part of the inbuilt working of these statistical softwares.
  14. 1 point

    From the album: April-June 2019

    © Benchmark Six Sigma

  15. 1 point
    It is necessary to have secondary metrics when we drive Six Sigma projects so that we are not solving one problem and creating another. In other words, we wouldn't be solving problems but they would just be changing shape. There could be several examples where the project fails despite improvement in the primary metric. Let's see a few here - 1. Customer Satisfaction increases but handling time increases 2. Order to ship time decreases but wrong deliveries increase 3. Order processing time of a certain component decreases but field failures increase 4. First Call Resolution increases but Handle Time also increases 5. A hair color that starts lasting longer but more users report damaged hair 6. Oil paints that dry faster but the pigments fade away faster. Please read the expert view given by Venugopal.
  16. 1 point
    Q. 154 Give some good examples, preferably from different Industries, where a Lean Six Sigma project was considered successful w.r.t Primary Metric (CTQ) but was later understood to be a big failure due to adverse impact on Secondary Metric. Please remember, your answer will not be visible immediately on responding. It will be made visible at about 5 PM IST on 26th April 2019, Friday to all 53000+ members. It is okay to research various online sources to learn and formulate your answer but when you submit your answer, make sure that it does not have content that is copied from elsewhere. Plagiarized answers will not be approved. (and therefore will not be displayed)  All Questions so far can be seen here - https://www.benchmarksixsigma.com/forum/lean-six-sigma-business-excellence-questions/ All rewards are mentioned here - https://www.benchmarksixsigma.com/forum/excellence-rewards/
  17. 1 point
    Benchmark Six Sigma Expert View by Venugopal R Let me narrate an incident from a layman perspective. After buying a large furniture from a well reputed company it had to be assembled after being delivered at home. Since the company mechanic was not turning up at the agreed time, I had to call up and urge him to come fast. When he arrived and started work, I observed him struggling with certain fasteners. Concerned about his capability, I questioned him why he was finding it so difficult. He said he had not brought the special tools required for the job… and he also added that he forgot them, since I asked him to hurry up! So bluntly, the blame was on the customer! Now, this response led me to think that I had stressed upon the company to get my work done fast (that too since they did not stick to agreed time), so the time for completing the job was the “Primary metric”, but I had not cautioned him to maintain any “Secondary Metric” – viz. “To ensure that necessary tools are not left behind”. His irresponsibility is being justified for me not having specified the ‘secondary metric’! I also wondered how many more secondary metrics should I have specified! The secondary metric is a factor that we do not want to compromise (knowingly or unknowingly), while we pursue to improve our primary metric (CTQ). In the above incident the failure by the mechanic and his reply reflects his callous attitude, though in effect, a secondary metric was compromised. However during business decisions, there could be unanticipated failures that could arise due to failure in a secondary metric, which happen to be a potential “Contradicting Factor” to the primary metric. Let me explain a couple of experiences where the secondary metric was not identified pro-actively and resulted in failures. The first one is a case where the sourcing of certain component of an IT hardware product had to be changed for reducing the import costs. The component samples obtained from new source were subjected to all evaluations, validations and pilot tests as per applicable standards and implemented. A few days after implementation, many field failures pertaining to this component started erupting. Upon detailed investigation and root cause analysis, it was revealed that the new component had been subjected to all the tests and validations that used to be done for the old one and approved as fit. However, there were certain special operating conditions under which some of the new components failed. These conditions had never been part of the part approval protocol, though the old component had been unobtrusively withstanding those conditions. This was a secondary metric that should ideally have been considered, but it was never known until the damage was done. Now, let’s look at another experience from IT services industry, where a particular instruction pertaining to certain data processing was simplified using automation techniques. Here the primary metric was to improve productivity. However, after implementation, it was observed that there were processing failures by experienced processors, whereas the processing quality by new processors was very good. The secondary metric that was missed out in this situation was that the ‘effective unlearning’ by the experienced processors, who continued to apply certain instructions that were no longer necessary. In both above cases the secondary metrics that turned out to cause failures were missed out while chartering the project. It is recommended that a fresh FMEA be carried out while implementing such changes so that as many potential failure modes may be surfaced and the associated secondary metrics addressed pro-actively.
  18. 1 point
    Hi All, I am basically from Operational back ground, very keen to understand the scope for improvements. from process excellence stand point, six sigma plays an integral part in terms of identifying the non value adds and stream line the controls resulting in a greater efficiency and utilization. enables a different perspective towards functional challenges and act towards the greater results.
  19. 1 point

    From the album: April-June 2019

    © Benchmark Six Sigma

  20. 1 point
    Dear Sandeep, Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is there in the industry for quite sometime now but more popularized in last 3 or 4 years. Considering the competition in every industry, every organization is trying to keep their operating cost low and provide the right product or service with right quality to the customers. It has become mandatory to every organization to search and implement new methods of production to improve the margins and quality at same time. RPA is becoming new buzz word or new method to talk and implement as every customer, organization, Industry are looking for change and a quick change. As a Lean Six Sigma Practitioner, our role has become more significant during initial stages of RPA implementations. In a simple way, A LSS Practitioner can identify and suggest the right opportunity to implement RPA by following structured method. Few debates are there saying that there is no involvement required from LSS Practitioners in RPA implementations as these would be pure technology driven. At the same time, I have observed that many projects are not able reach their end objective on time (Please read the line again... NOT ABLE TO REACH THEIR END OBJECTIVE ON TIME) due to lack of structured methodology during initial phases. A Lean Six Sigma Practitioner can support/add value to make the RPA projects success as below. 1) Understanding the objectives and preparing the business case for improvement 2) Establishing right metrics to measure the improvement 3) Preparing detailed VSM to identify highly manual repetitive time consuming process steps. 4) Estimating the benefits by performing cost vs. benefit analysis (All the processes may not yield greater ROI but many qualitative aspects to consider) 4) Design/Re-design the process to make it suitable for RPA (Please note that automating the process As-Is may not give desired results) 5) Standardize the input and handoffs 6) Support the RPA developers with suitable functional guidance 7) Tracking and Monitoring the projects with robust governance models (Depending on PMO structure in the organization) 8) Evaluating the outcomes (Metrics, Benefits) post implementation Depending on organization's project management structure, LSS Practitioner can have greater role to play in implementing RPA projects. Few organizations have started RPA consultant roles to manage all the activities mentioned above and few are managing with existing LSS teams. Fundamental method would be the same irrespective of organization structure however, LSS practitioners will have additional edge of LSS methods and concepts to get quick results. Hope this helps.
This leaderboard is set to Kolkata/GMT+05:30
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      2,597
    • Total Posts
      12,269
×
×
  • Create New...