Somanathan Krishnamurthy

Sir, Is that above mentioned tools are common for Manufacturing and IT industry? Request to explain in detail

How To Compare Six Sigma, Lean and the Theory of Constraints A framework for choosing what is the best for your organization: First, identify the primary theory. What is the core emphasis of the program or methodology? This core emphasis is usually a few words or a short phrase: Six Sigma is variation reduction, lean’s is waste reduction and TOC is constraint reduction. Then identify the relationship between the primary theory and the primary focus of the tools and methodology. This relationship indicates how the primary theory manifests itself in tangible results. What I call the primary effect. This is an if/then type of relationship: For Six Sigma: If we focus on reducing variation, then we will have more uniform process output. For lean: If we focus on waste removal, then flow time will improve. For TOC: If we focus on constraints, then throughput volume will improve.

For Product Audits Defects per Vehicle ( DPU ) is the target For Supplier Parts PPM is the target

Thanks

Foundations of Lean principles can be traced back to Toyota Production System (TPS) Taiichi Ohno, the founder of TPS said: “All we are doing is looking at the time line from the moment the customer gives an order to the point when we collect cash. And we are reducing the time line by removing the non-value added wastes.†Objective of Lean is to increase process speed and reduce invested capital. Lean philosophy: “One piece at a time†“Synchronized flow†“Pull System†“Eliminate waste†in the value stream Objective of Six Sigma is to reduce variation Metric: Measure process variation Methodology : Consistent use of DMAIC/DMADV model Team based problem solving,Measurement-based process analysis, improvement and control Management System Six Sigma drives strategy execution Leadership, sponsorship and review Metrics driven governance process Engagement across the organization

I am strong believer of Total employee involvement thro TQM (Deming approach )+ Lean Six SIGMA( ( Projects to save Crores of Rupees )+QMS Through ISO/TS 16949 2009 + EMS +OHAS and I am leading the programs

Great. New thinking new possibilities

You have one rupee and I have one rupee we exchanged it - This is Transaction You have an Idea and I have an idea we exchanged it Now both we have two ideas - This is Transformation

Nesting a. Contain the object inside another which, in turn, is placed inside a third object b. Pass an object through a cavity of another object Examples: Telescoping antenna Chairs which stack on top of each other for storage Mechanical pencil with lead stored inside

Earn Joy ( ENJOY ).pptx

One of the major differences between Six Sigma and other improvement approaches is its significant dependence on data based approach using statistical methods. In Six Sigma, we first convert a real life practical problem into a statistical problem. This is like modeling a process. The process response is usually called “Key Process Output Variable†(KPOV). Examples of KPOVs could be: Yield of a process Quality Level such as customer acceptance Market Share Cycle Time Productivity Health Index Customer Satisfaction Index Repair Time Reliability Down Time Inventory Turns As we may observe, our objective will be to maximize some of these KPOVs such as Yield, Market Share, Customer Satisfaction Index, Productivity, Inventory Turns. On the other hand, we would like to minimize some of the KPOVs. For example, Cycle Time, Repair Time, Down Time, Rejections. Thus our first task is to decide the objective of our Six Sigma Project, its current level and our target. While Six Sigma Level of achievement corresponds to 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO), we cannot reach this level without a series of Six Sigma Projects in the same direction. The target level of KPOV should be decided by expectation of your customers and industry benchmarks. Thus if the current yield of a process is 85%, we may strive for 90% as a next target. Later, we may take projects to achieve next levels of achievements. Usually, the difficulty levels increase in geometric proportion

Brand getting Enjoy ( Earn Joy ) from Quality

Introduction Following World War II, the high quality, technologically advanced products of the United States dominated world markets. With the oil shock of the 1970’s, however, many of the economic advantages associated with cheap petroleum were lost and the recovered economies of Europe and Asia emerged as strong competitors in many product areas. The innovative technologies of the US could no longer insulate industries from the customer oriented approaches of European and Asian producers. The 1990’s have seen the recovery of many US industries, most notably the automotive industry. This has been due in part to the influence of many Japanese quality methodologies introduced by the late Dr. Kaoru Ishikawa, Dr. Masao Kogure, Dr. Yoji Akao, Dr. Noriaki Kano,Mr. Masaaki Imai, and many others. These quality methods have helped US industries reduce defects, improve quality, lower costs and become more customer focused. As the quality gap with countries like Japan gets smaller, the US is looking for new approaches to assure customer satisfaction, reduce costs, and bring products to the market faster. In the US, They say "better, cheaper, faster." While there are many widely used design and development approaches such as Quality Function Deployment, these show them what to solve but not always how to solve the technology bottlenecks that arise. One technique, the Reviewed Dendrogram, relies on the experience of designers which may be limited to certain areas of expertise such as chemistry or electronics. Thus, a solution that might be simpler and cheaper using magnetism could be missed. For example, a materials engineer searching for a dampener may limit his search to rubber based materials. to four parts and a cost savings of 50%. A more efficient solution might lie in creating a magnetic field. Since this is outside the experience of the engineer, how could he imagine such a solution? Using TRIZ, he would be able to explore design solutions in fields other than his own. Rockwell International's Automotive Division faced a problem like this. They were losing a competitive battle with a Japanese company over the design of brakes for a golf cart. Since both Rockwell and the Japanese competitor were in the automotive field, they were competing on redesigns of an automobile brake system but with smaller components. In TRIZ, this seeking solutions only in one's field is called "psychological inertia" because it is natural for people to rely on their own experience and not think outside their specialty. With TRIZ, the problem was solved by redesigning a bicycle brake system with larger components. The result was a part reduction from twelve to four parts and a cost savings of 50%.

If the Pilot can always land the Aircraft within 50% of Runway area…… He is of Six Sigma Quality - why?

TS is the system approach and six sigma is systematic approach

Good Article to read