Showing posts with label six sigma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label six sigma. Show all posts

19 March 2013

What does Akao say? Mu!

A recent poll on the LinkedIn group Lean Six Sigma Worldwide asked:

"Which Lean Six Sigma waste reduction (Muda, Mura, Muri) is the most effective way to increase profitability?"

Quality professionals know the first three Mu as three Japanese words: Muda meaning waste, Muri meaning strain, and Mura meaning discrepancy.

I'd like to add a 4th Mu to the list – Muchakucha ムチャクチャ meaning horrendous, reckless, confused and messy, and mad. In other words, don't blindly follow what others do.

There has been much discussion in the lean and six sigma communities that, like TQM a few years ago, these quality initiatives have become too vanilla flavored and over hyped to the point of diminishing returns. This is the result of failing to custom tailor the tools and training to the cultural DNA of the organization.

Our QFD community faced this problem early on when House of Quality (the tool) became synonymous with QFD (the process). Companies in every industry copied the truncated 4-house auto parts model, became overwhelmed by its simultaneous complexity (takes too much time) and simplicity (doesn't address my problem), and quickly burned out. By the mid-1990s, Dr. Yoji Akao was sufficiently worried that QFD would be abandoned, and he asked the QFD Institute to find a way to make QFD more adaptable and faster.

The result was the Blitz QFD® approach which now precedes and can sometimes replace the House of Quality and subsequent matrices. It is highly scalable and adaptable, and is the core of what we now teach in the QFD Green Belt® and QFD Black Belt® courses.

Now, specifically to the LinkedIn poll question: Profit is the difference between revenue and cost. The Lean and six sigma community focus on the cost side – remove waste, improve productivity. There is a limit, though, on cost reduction. Theoretically, once you reach zero cost, where can you go?

QFD, on the other hand, focuses on the revenue side. If we can provide more value to customers by helping them solve their problems, enable their opportunities, and improve their image, then more customers will pay more money for the product or service.  The limit is the size of the global market. Smart customers (the ones you want) won't mind paying 99 cents for one dollar of benefit.





23 January 2012

QFD and Six Sigma DMAIC

from the QFDI newsletter, January 2012

Efforts to standardize and strengthen product and process improvements are greatly welcomed in modern organizations, and nothing does it better than the DMAIC (define-measure-analyze-improve-control) approach in six sigma. This 21st version of Shewhart’s and Deming’s PDSA (plan-do-study-act) technique is the backbone of ongoing quality improvements in today’s leading companies.

The purpose of quality improvement is to eliminate the costs and losses associated with defects and deviations from targets. The process starts with defining those targets and how to measure them, and then determining what the current level of performance is. Next is to identifying the causes of why current performance fails to meet those targets.

Causal factors can be analyzed as those related to the 4 Ms, or those attributable to workers (men), equipment (machine), processes (method), or design (materials). Advanced thinkers may also include method of measurement (ex. poor gauging or measurement techniques), money (lack of funds to make desired improvements), and management (lack of top level support to invest in and support a quality culture). Let us know if you have identified other “M”s, please.

Once causal factors have been identified, data analysis helps focus on those with the strongest contribution to improving performance. Since DMAIC attends to current products and processes, data can be collected to statistically calculate the correlation between a causal factor and the undesirable effects of the defect.

Improvements to the undesirable effect are made by improving these highly correlated causal factors, and training workers, upgrades or better maintenance of equipment, new processes, or better design are investigated and tested. In addition to efficacy of these improvements, other feasibility constraints such as cost to implement, time to implement, etc. are considered in deciding what and when to implement.

Once the improvement is in place, standardization of the improvement is needed to prevent falling back to old ways. Thus, ongoing data collection helps control any deviations to the new process.

What Role Can QFD Play in DMAIC?

QFD has typically focused on new product development; the large time-consuming “houses” of classical QFD are considered overkill for addressing concerns with local problems associated with production or service delivery failures. Rather, QFD is an approach for identifying customer needs far upstream from production, even prior to design phases in order to define quality from a customer or user perspective and assure it is designed into the new product and quality assured during its build and delivery.