Implementing Six Sigma

Implementing Six Sigma

When I entered the conference room, the tension was so thick you could have cut it with a knife. How could a discussion of a data driven problem-solving program create this much emotion?

It wasn’t as if it were an unproven entity. Six Sigma had been implemented all over the world. I assumed that the addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division that drove the statistics would work the same here as it did in the rest of the world. Maybe the issue was the data-driven decision-making. The gurus always feel threatened. Kind of a territorial thing, I think. Time to enter the lion’s den.

When bringing a new order, the best you can hope for is lukewarm support from those who were not doing well under the current structure and outright hostility from those who were doing well.

Sid motioned to a chair to his left. That probably did not give the impression of power. It could have if I would have been on the right, but it was at his end of the table. I guess it would have to do.

Sid introduced me to his staff and then spoke directly to me. “We discussed the basics of a Six Sigma program, but it seems there are a few more issues. We would like to get your expert opinion on them.”

“I will try to answer any questions you have,” I told him, thinking to myself that it was nice to have the president characterize my opinions as “expert,” even though I wasn’t sure what data he had used to determine that.

Outlining how you will promote and support Six Sigma with the entire management team is critical to the acceptance of the deployment as it moves forward. Some will perceive any change as a threat.

Sid began the meeting by saying, “The idea of Six Sigma was initiated by our CFO, Bill Payer. Bill has read the reports about the large financial returns that many companies are reporting from using the ‘breakthrough strategy.’ Bill feels if it yields this level of return on investment, then we should get some of this breakthrough for our manufacturing. Ben Thair, our Vice President of Manufacturing, doesn’t like the insinuation that we are wasting that much money in our factories. We have already been engaged in many improvement initiatives, such as TQM. He doesn’t believe there is much opportunity remaining in our factories. What do you think?”

“First, we need to make it clear that Six Sigma has never been a manufacturing program,” I explained. “Even when it was introduced at Motorola, the objective was to be Six Sigma in everything we do, which included non-manufacturing operations. GE Capital and many other financial institutions, call centers, and public utilities have all had successful deployments. The financial returns are well documented. Most legitimate Six Sigma providers require that the financial community sign off on any claims about savings. Many of the larger companies are publishing these savings in their annual reports, which are verified by major accounting firms.”

I looked around the room to see if they were following me. Then I continued.

“As far as there not being any opportunities left because you have already done TQM, you have to understand there is a continuum of tools and techniques. When you reach a certain level, you have to find a way to move to the next level. It isn’t an issue of who is better; it is simply choosing the correct

tool for the job. Not every problem is a Six Sigma project. So, if you can fix it with TQM, then that is what you use. We couldn’t buy good quality then and it still can’t be bought today. Eliminating defects and waste and effecting change is a function of hard work. Period.”

Six Sigma should not just focus on manufacturing or operations. In order to optimize the opportunity,

all processes should be improved with the MAIC methodology.

Sid said, “Thank you for the input. We have another issue. Our Vice President of Quality feels that Six Sigma isn’t anything new; it’s just the same collection of tools that have always been around. We’ve trained a lot of people over the years on how to use these tools already. Besides, consultants for Six Sigma charge a lot of money. You’ve been through the training, Sam. What do you think?”

I tried to remain calm—which was difficult because the answers seemed to me like common sense—and a waste of time. But I took a deep breath and addressed the question.

“The point of Six Sigma is not now and never was about introducing new tools,” I explained. “We really don’t need any new tools at this point, since the quality community rarely uses the more sophisticated ones we have. The Six Sigma methodology focuses on being able to link the tools together into a logical flow. Data is moved from one tool to another so that there is a synergy throughout the project. It’s that synergy that increases the probability of problem resolution,” I concluded.

I could see several nods of comprehension from around the room, so I moved on, to tackle the financial issue.

“As far as what the consultants are paid, it is a business decision, like any value proposition. Most credible Six Sigma providers have track records of verifiable results. It’s not just a training program for the sake of training. A Black Belt candidate who doesn’t produce results doesn’t get certified.”

Sid thanked me for the information and asked if there were any other questions. Nobody had any further questions. Sid told them where I was working in the factory and suggested that, if they had any other questions, they could find me through Celia. I was sure it would not be the end of this conversation.

Key Points

Any change to the current process will be perceived as a threat by employees. The Champion needs to understand and address this issue.

Outlining the entire Six Sigma process with every member of the management team is an essential step in a successful implementation and will result in complete understanding of the process.

Six Sigma is for the entire organization, not solely for manufacturing or operations. Every process needs to be addressed.