Sixsig

SIX SIGMA
Copyright Motorola Inc.

Presented by
JOHN A. LUPIENSKI

“Quality Is Our Job, Customer Satisfaction Is Our Duty, Customer Loyalty Is Our Future”

What We Will Cover
• Motorola Overview
• Quality Journey
• Six Sigma The Concept
• Deployment
• Results
• The Future
• Lessons Learned



Motorola Statistics
•
•

24th in Fortune 500

•

1st in Electronics Manufacturing

•

7th in Total Exports

•


1997 Sales $29.8 Billion (42% / 58%)

142,000 Employees in 53 countries


1997 Sales
By Product
LMPS
16%

By Region

Other
10%
GSS
40%

Latin America,
Africa, ROW
13%
Japan
6%
China/
Hong Kong
11%

MIMS
13%

Asia
Pacific
9%
SPS
21%

United
States
42%

Europe
19%


The Rules of Engagement
The Past
Product

Customer/Consumer

Business Unit

Enterprise (Motorola)

Motorola


The Future

Business Unit/Product


Communications Enterprise

THE
C O M M U N IC A T IO N S
E N T E R P R IS E

PERSO NAL
C O M M U N IC A T IO N S
SECTOR

Cellular Phones
Pagers
 Consumer 2-Way
Products
 Accessories




NETW O RK
M ANAG EM ENT
G RO UP

Terrestrial
Network Operators
 Satellite Network
Operators


C O M M E R C IA L ,
G O VERNM ENT
A N D IN D U S T R IA L
S O L U T IO N S S E C T O R

Systems
Equipment
 Software
 Services
 Applications
 Content



NETW O RK
S O L U T IO N S
SECTOR

Cellular
Infrastructures
 Satellite
Infrastructures


G LO BAL TELECOM
S O L U T IO N S
G RO UP

Global Network
Operator Solutions
 Integrate PCS &
NSS Products


IN T E R N E T A N D
N E T W O R K IN G
G RO UP

Servers
S/W Applications
 Internet Solutions

Data Networking




ACCES
A U T O M O T IV E .C O M P O N E N T ,
CO M PUTER AND
ENERG Y SECTOR

A U T O M O T IV E
& IN D U S T R IA L
E L E C T R O N IC S
G RO UP

Powertrain Controls
Autobody Controls

Sensors
 Telematics

CO M PO NENT
PRO DUCTS
G RO UP

Ceramics
Lighting

Quartz Products

Oscillators
 SAWs

ENERGY
SYSTEM S
G RO UP

Battery Products
Battery Chargers

Power Supplies














FLAT PANEL
D IS P L A Y
D IV IS IO N



Flat Panel Displays

M O TO R O LA
CO M PUTER
G RO UP




Embedded Systems
Single Board PCs


SPS
S E M IC O N D U C T O R
PRO DUCTS
SECTO R

T R A N S P O R T A T IO N
SYSTEM S
G RO UP

Systems Electronics
Transportation
Technology

Industrial

CO NSUM ER
SYSTEM S
G RO UP

Imaging
Displays & Modems
 Storage

Entertainment

Consumer Media

W IR E L E S S
S U B S C R IB E R
SYSTEM S G RO UP

Telephony
Messaging

Wireless

New Media














NETW O RK AND
C O M P U T IN G
SYSTEM S G RO UP

Modems

Switching

Networking

Customer
Equipment
 Base Stations
 PC Technology


S E M IC O N D U C T O R
CO M PO NENTS
G RO UP

Key Components
Distribution

Contract
Manufacture
 Emerging Markets




Motorola Products
•
•
•
•
•

Cellular Telephones
Two Way Communications
Pagers
Semiconductors
Automotive Electronic Modules and
Components
• Modems and Integrated Management Systems
• Cellular and Satellite Infrastructure Systems



Global Facilities
UNITED KINGDOM

CANADA

GERMANY

Basingstoke, Stotfold, Swindon
Easter Inch, East Kilbride
Cork, Swords
DENMARK
Copenhagen

Flensburg, Munich
Taunusstein, Dresden

FRANCE

Angers, Bordeaux,
Toulouse
CHINA
Tianjin

Brampton,
North York

JAPAN

Aizu Wakamatsu,
Tokyo, Sendai

Richmond

SOUTH KOREA

TAIWAN Seoul
Chung-Li

MEXICO

HONG KONG
Kowloon

Guadalajara
Mexico City
Chihuahua

ISRAEL

COSTA RICA

Tel Aviv
Arad

Guadeloupe

BRAZIL
Sao Paulo


INDIA
Bangalore

SINGAPORE
MALAYSIA

PHILIPPINES
Manila

AUSTRALIA

Melbourne
Kuala Lumpur
Penang, Seremban Adelaide


Quality Journey



Changing Motorola's Quality Culture
1979 "Our Quality Stinks."
The environment
- A U.S. Centered Company
- Japan Inc. Attacking
- Quality Control Mindset



1979

•

"Our Quality Stinks."

1980 •Corporate Quality Officer named
Business Leadership
- Senior Business Leader
- Change in focus



1979 • "Our Quality Stinks."
1980 • Corporate Quality Officer named

1981 • Motorola Training Center established
• 5 year 10X improvement goal
• Corporate Quality Council
- Senior Leaders
- Common culture
- Lead, Teach, Audit


The Corporate Quality Office
Suppliers

Customers
Business Units
Assess

Education
Quality Reviews
• Short term results

QSR
Process

CQO
Quality Council

- Lead
- Teach
• Lead
- Audit
• Teach
• Audit

Motorola
University

• Courseware

Recommendations on
vision and direction
Management Board


1979 • "Our Quality Stinks."
1980 • Corporate Quality Officer named

1981 • Motorola Training Center established
• 5 year 10X improvement goal
• MCQC
• Quality System Review
- Common audit tool
- Set Standards of Excellence
- Process oriented
- Set direction, not methods


QSR Manual

Guidelines

April 1998



Assessment Vehicle for Total Organization
• Sets a common goal of perfection
• Drives progress to world class standards
• Provides an awareness of quality process requirements
• Cross-fertilization of ideas (knowledge sharing)
• Teaching tool (auditors and auditees)


1981 • Began focus on Quality

Q
S
R

1982 • MCQC began a process of biennial QSRs
1986 • Six Sigma Quality and Total Customer Satisfaction introduced
1987 • Software subsystem was added
1988 • QSR was established for surveying suppliers’ quality systems
• ISO 9001 Mapped unto QSR
1989 • Weight of scores changed to emphasize Malcolm Baldrige criteria

H
I
S
T
O
R
Y

1990 • MCQC approved the use of cross-functional survey teams
1991 • Internal and supplier QSRs are combined into the current
QSR forms and the QSR Guidelines
1994 • Updated to include 1994 Revision of ISO 9001
• Significant revisions to Subsystem 9, System 7
1995 • Corporate Quality System Department formed
1996 • Revision 4 includes Registrar’s Certification, Subsystem 11
and QS 9000 Supplement
1997 • Revision 5 - Business Process Focus, QS 9000 approach
• SEI Certification of SS 10

Quality Subsystems
1.

Quality System Management

2.

New Product / Technology / Service Development Control

3.

Supplier (Internal or External) Control

4.

Process Operation and Control

5.

Quality Data Programs

6.

Problem Solving Techniques

7.

Control of Quality Measurement Equipment and Systems

8.

Human Resource Involvement

9.

Customer Satisfaction Assessment

10.
11.

Legal and regulatory

12.

Software Quality Assurance

QS 9000 checklist


1979

• "Our Quality Stinks."

1980

• Corporate Quality Officer named

1981

• Motorola Training Center established
•

5 year, 10x quality improvement goal set

•

QSR Implemented

1985 • Communications Sector begins total
defect per unit measurement
July - Manufactured Products
November - Sales Orders


A Common Metric

Total defects per unit
• Count Defects
• Independent variable
• Ownership


Benchmarking
IRS - Tax Advice (phone-in)

100K

(66810 ppm)

10K

Restaurant Bills
Doctor Prescription Writing
Payroll Processing
Order Write-up
Journal Vouchers
Wire Transfers

Average
Company(6210 ppm)

1K

Purchased Material
Lot Reject Rate Air Line Baggage
Handling

(233 ppm)

100

10

Best in Class
1

2

3

4

SIGMA

Domestic Airline
Flight Fatality Rate

(3.4 ppm)

5

6

(0.43 ppm)

7

(with ±1.5 Sigma Shift)


The Quality Evolution Continues!
1987 • Corporation adopts Six Sigma
• 2 year, 10x; 4 year, 100x quality improvement;
• Six Sigma by 1992 goal is set



The Motorola Card
KEY BELIEFS– how we will always act
• Constant Respect for People
• Uncompromising Integrity

OUR FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIVE
(Everyone's Overriding Responsibility
Total Customer Satisfaction

KEY GOALS– what we must accomplish
• Best in Class
—People
—Marketing
—Technology
—Product: Software, Hardware and
Systems
—Manufacturing
—Service
• Increased Global Market Share
• Superior Financial Results
KEY INITIATIVES– how we will do it
• Six Sigma Quality
• Total Cycle Time Reduction
• Product, Manufacturing and
Environmental
Leadership
• Profit Improvement
• Empowerment for all, in a Participative,
Cooperative and Creative Workplace



1987

• Corporation adopts Six Sigma
Six Sigma by 1992 goal is set

1988 • Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
• U.S. Government sponsored
• Privately funded
• Promote excellence in business



1987

• Corporation adopts Six Sigma
Six Sigma by 1992 goal is set

1988

• Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
• Mapped ISO 9001 into QSR

1990 • TCS Team process starts Corporate wide



Total Customer Satisfaction Teams
• TDU focused problem solving
• QCC/PPS provided platform
- QCC JUSE
- PPS Government
• Narrow teams vs. broader virtual
- Multifunctional
- Virtual : problem centered
• Competition: National scoring
• 1990 First Sector competition
• 1991 Corporate

Today: 6000 Teams - Customers & Suppliers


Management of the Quality
Improvement Process
1981 – 1986
Diverse quality metrics results in different
improvement goals for each operation.
1987 – 1992
Common quality metric results in identical
improvement rate goal for all operations.
• Manufacturing and non-manufacturing
• Administration and operations
• Factory and office


Other Quality Awards Received *
1992
- Winner: Malaysia National Quality Award
- Winner: NY State Excelsior Quality Award
1994
- Winner: Israel National Quality Award
1996
- Winner: Singapore National Quality Award
* All Patterned after MBNQA


Six Sigma The Concept



A Traditional View

Market Share
Sales Growth
Profitability

• Output Variables

Manage the outputs.


A Non-traditional View
Product Quality
Service
COQ

• Input Variables

On-Time Delivery
Relationships
Credit Terms
Customer
Training

Customer Satisfaction

Market Share
Sales Growth
Profitability

• Output Variables

Manage the inputs; respond to the outputs.


The Concept of "Six Sigma" at Motorola
Different numbers of Opportunities ...

A Bit of Statistics ...
-1.5 Sigma

+1.5 Sigma

Lower spec limit

upper spec limit

+

Manufacturing Processes

6σ
Administrative Areas

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-4.0

-5.0

-6.0

-7.0

3.4 ppm
or Zero

Customers or Suppliers

= A structural approach to continuous improvement
( or “ Six steps toward excellence” )
1 - Identify the product or service you provide

4 - Define the process for doing work

2 - Identify your customers & their requirements

5 - Eliminate defect sources / optimize the process

3 - Determine your needs & suppliers

6 - Continuously improve the Sigma level



Normal Distribution - Gaussian Curve
RE
D

CE
NS
O

σ =

σ

Sigma = σ = Deviation

2
∑ ( xi − x )

( Square root of variance )

n −1

=

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

-4

-5

-6

-7

Axis graduated in Sigma

between + / - 1σ
between + / - 2σ

95.45 %

45500 ppm

between + / - 3σ

99.73 %

2700 ppm

between + / - 4σ

99.9937 %

63 ppm

between + / - 5σ

99.999943 %

0.57 ppm

between + / - 6σ


68.27 %

99.9999998 %

0.002 ppm

result: 317300 ppm outside
(deviation)


Six Sigma...And the Statistics
-1.5 Sigma +1.5 Sigma
Upper spec. limit

Lower spec. limit

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

-1.0

-2.0

-3.0

-4.0

-5.0

-6.0

-7.0

3.4 ppm
or Zero

 Reduce the variation: when σ < = Design specification width / 12 
 Stabilize the process, without affecting the variance,
Cp > = 2 and
to limit the maximum process shift to +/- 1.5σ



Cp > = 2
Cpk > = 1.5

 Under these conditions, and in the worst case, there will be no more than a 3.4 ppm
 defect (reject) level, with specification limits at 4.5σ on one side and 7.5σ on the other.

 Note: One can see that the point corresponding to 6 on the graduated performance

scale above is measured in ”Sigma’s” (with 6σ corresponding to a 3.4 ppm defect level).



Six Sigma...And Capability
Cp =

Design specification width
6σ
Mean - Spec Limit

Cpk = Min.

σ

3σ
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Cp

0.33 0.66

1

1.33

1.66

2

2.33

2.66

Cpk

-0.16 0.16

0.5

0.83

1.16

1.5

1.83

2.16

With a maximum process shift of +/- 1.5 σ



The Opportunities...
Different Numbers of Opportunities ...

Manufacturing Process

6σ
Administra tive Areas
Customers or Suppliers

- Customers or Suppliers: One opportunity per product delivered or
per component purchased.
- Manufacturing process:

Σ

- Administrative areas:

Number of opportunities for error for
each activity performed


(Opportunities at each process step)


Some Examples of Opportunity
Customer Perspective: 1 opportunity per product delivered
ex. 1 regulator = 1 opportunity
1 controller = 1 opportunity
Production lines:
Regulator = 160 opportunities
Controller = 1200 opportunities
Form( Payment, Purchase Order, .. ): Number of fields
Expedite / Delivery:
1 opportunity / packaging unit



Sigma and Opportunities
Num

ber o
f Def
ects
Num
ber o
f Uni = D.P
.U
ts

1 Opp ortu nity =

D.

M.
P.

Op

.O
.P.M

p.

00 D
000 = es
10
ti
U x
.
tuni
or
D.P
Opp
of
ber
Num

A quality level of " 6σ" corresponds to less
than 3.4 defects per million Opportunities
( i.e., correct 99.99966 % of the time )


A Universal Measurement Scale ...
Sigma

7
6
5
4
On one condition :

ε

3

Calculate the defects and
estimate the opportunities
in the same way...

DPMOp

3.4
233
6210
66810



Measurement With SIGMA Is Simple !!!
Estimate the
Opportunities

Count the
Defects

Follow the Indicator :
Defects per million Opportunities
6σ= 3.4 dpmo

Conversion into "Sigma" can
be accomplished with the help
of a statistical table.


Converting Defect Levels to..... Sigma !
An Example :
175 defects are identified while
producing 5000 controllers
D.P.U = 175 / 5000 = 0.035
The manufacture of one controller
allows for 1367 defect opportunities.
D.P.Op = 0.035 / 1367 = 0.0000256
D.P.M.Op = 25.6

"Sigma" level : 5.55



Six Sigma: An Ambitious Objective?
• Accurate to 99.99966 % ( less than 3.4 defects for each million
opportunities ) could appear excessive....!
99.9% is already VERY GOOD !
But what could happen at a quality level of 99.9% (i.e., 1000 ppm),
in our everyday lives (about 4.6σ)?
•

4000 wrong medical prescriptions each year
•

•

More than 3000 newborns accidentally falling
from the hands of nurses or doctors each year

Two long or short landings at American airports each day
• 400 letters per hour which never arrive at their destination



The Impact of Quality: “6 Sigma Suppliers”
• 13 wrong drug prescriptions per year
• 10 newborn babies dropped by doctors/nurses
per year
• Two short or long landings per year in all the
airports in the U.S.
• One lost article of mail per hour



Six Sigma and Continuous Improvement
= A structured approach to continuous improvement
( or ”Six steps toward excellence" )
1 - Identify the product or service you provide

4 - Define the process for doing work

2 - Identify the customer & their requirements

5 - Eliminate defect sources / optimize the process

3 - Determine your needs & suppliers

6 - Continuously improve the Sigma level
Feedback

6

3

Supplier

Enter
Needs

Process
Activity

5

Exit 1
Product/Service

2

Customer

4



Defect Reduction: “Peeling the Onion”
SUPPLIER

•

Process
step 1

RECORD
DEFECTS

•

Process
step 2

RECORD
DEFECTS

•

Process
step 3

RECORD
DEFECTS

•

CUSTOMER

RECORD
DEFECTS

RECORD
DEFECTS

TREND CHART

PROCEDURE
GOAL
TIME

MEASURE

RESULTS AND
INSTITUTIONALIZE

ANALYZE

PROBLEM SOLVE
ACTION PLAN
Action
Name

BRAINSTORMING/
PARETO ANALYSIS/
ROOT CAUSE
IDENTIFICATION

Date
100%

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT MODEL

•


Advantages of This Type of Approach
•
•
•
•
•
•

Have a common language
Sensitize the organization in the use of statistical tools
Develop the internal supplier/customer relationship
Benchmarking
Work on the most significant objectives
Promote working in teams


T C
Culture
S of
Excellence


Deployment



The Process for Deployment
• Management involvement

• Empowered teams

• Statistical “black belts”



Why Have We Been Successful...
The Management Process!
• High level of management commitment and
involvement.
• Aggressive improvement goals set by Management
Board and driven down through the organization.
• Measurement of the total process from end to end.
• Corporate-wide uniform goals and common metrics.
• Management accountability for quality
improvement.


Management Leadership
DATED JAN 15, 1987
IMPROVE PRODUCT AND SERVICES QUALITY • • • •
Ten times by 1989 and at least 100 fold by 1991
Achieve SIX SIGMA CAPABILITY by 1992
With a deep sense of urgency, spread dedication to every facet of the
corporation and achieve a culture of continual improvement to ASSURE
TOTAL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION. There is only one ultimate goal:
zero defects - in everything we do.
Signed: MOTOROLA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE


Why We Have Been Successful...
The Management Process!
• Quality improvement goals and plans
integrated into business plans.
• No formal organization changes to implement.
• Part of everyone's job.
• Employee empowerment and involvement.
• Extensive education and training support.
• Recognition and awards.


Management of the Improvement Process
• Corporate review of Sectors quarterly
• Sector review of Group monthly
• Group review of products monthly
• Plant review of manufacturing lines weekly
• Manufacturing line review of processes daily
• Same measurement - same improvement goal



Employee Involvement Requires
• Awareness
– How are we doing?
– How are the best in class doing?

• Training
– Tools, Methodology, Metrics

• High expectations
– Team goal setting

• Communication
– Progress and recognition



Empowered Teams
• It’s a business-driven process, not a human relations
program
• It starts with senior management - can’t be delegated
• Employees want to take ownership and become world
class producers
• You don’t need a crisis to get started
• Empowerment affects all functions, not just factories
• Done right, it’s an irreversible process


Worldwide TCS Team Count
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
0

2000

4000

6000


A Black Belt Is . . .
An Individual from Any Discipline with
Advanced Statistical, Quality, and
Interpersonal Skills
An Experienced and Proven Leader in the use
Six Sigma Strategies and Tools



A Black Belt Will . . .
Drive the Effective Use of Statistical Methods
through Leadership, Training , and
Consultation
Identify, Develop, and Communicate New
Six Sigma Strategies and Tools
Actively Identify and Mentor Future Black
Belts


Use of Six Sigma Black Belts
• Highly trained in statistical tools
• Act as consultants / change agents
• Recognized as skilled in an engineering discipline
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills
• Significant experience with demonstrated results
• Continuous learning aptitude



Black Belt Training
• Green Belt
– Utilize Statistical & Quality Techniques
– 2%-5% of Time (1-2 hrs/week) Consulting/Training
– Min. 2 Projects* per Year

• Black Belt
–
–
–
–

Lead use of Statistical & Quality Techniques
Mentor Green Belts; Communicate New Techniques
5%-10% of Time (2-4 hrs/week) Consulting/Training
Min. 4 Projects* per Year

• Master Black Belt
– Mentors Green & Black Belts
– 80%-100% of Time Consulting/Mentoring/Training
*Projects = training classes or project consultations


Corporate Commitment
“Motorola is committed to developing these leaders. We owe it to our
customers and to our stockholders. Through IDE, we seek to identify
those who have the potential to grow into agents of change. We provide
these people with extensive training in statistical and interpersonal tools,
and we provide skilled guidance and management support to assure that
they are able to build and integrate their capabilities.
Once their development has achieved a level worthy of recognition,
we even have a term for those exceptional individuals, whose talent,
dedication, and courage enable them to accelerate our progress into and
beyond the next century.
We call these people ‘Six Sigma Black Belts.’”
Chris Galvin



History of Six Sigma Black Belt Program
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

1990 - Motorola DOE Symposium Committee organized
1991 - Motorola Six Sigma Research Institute established
1991 - Corporate Six Sigma Black Belt Steering Committee
formed
1992 - Initiated an effort between Motorola, TI, IBM, Kodak and
others to jointly develop the Six Sigma Black Belt Program
1992 - Six Sigma Technical Institute (SSTI) developed as a
required training vehicle for Black Belt candidates
1992 - First Six Sigma Black Belts recognized in Asia and US
1993 - First Six Sigma Black Belt symposium held
1996 - SPS Six Sigma Black Belt Steering committee formed
1996 - “Intro. to Black Belt Program” replaces SSTI as required
course
1998 - Motorola Elma leads AIEG/ACCES group wide push for
Black Belts - Reintroduces program

Expectations of Six Sigma Black
Belts
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Problem solving leadership
Improvement change agents
Drive use of statistical methods
Integrate statistics into discipline area
Network for solution reuse
Mentor future Belts
Continue personal development



Barrier Breakthrough Plan
Pareto, Brainstorming, C&E, BvC
SIGMA

8D, 7D, TCS Teams, SPC

100.00

5.3

DOE, DFM, PC

5.4

DPMOp

RenewBlack Belt Program (Internal Motorola)

5.5
5.6
5.65

Black Belt Program (External Suppliers)

10.00

Proliferation of Master Black Belts

6 Sigma

1.00
J94


6

MY95

MY96
J95

MY97
J96

MY98
J97


How does one become ‘Belted’
Phase 1: Candidate Identification and Mentor Structure
Identify candidate
Management sponsorship
Master Black Belt Mentor
Define Black Belt responsibilities
Phase 2: Skill Development
Black Belt Orientation Class
Personal Skill Development
High Impact Improvement Project
Phase 3: Recognition
Application for recognition
Black Belt Recognition
Continuous Improvement


Core

GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
BM
BM
BM
BM
BM
M
M
M

Statistical Skills
Statistical Software (JMP, Minitab)
MIN101
Numerical and Graphical Techniques
MIN101, IBM548
Statistical Process Control
AEC506, AEC661, AEC662, AEC663
Process Capability
AEC661, AEC662, SCP201
Comparative Tests
MIN101, SPC201
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
ENG998, AEC603
Measurement System Analysis
AEC663
Design of Experiments (e.g. Full,
Fractional, Taguchi Designs)
ENG998, QUA389
Regression (e.g. linear, nonlinear)

GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM

Six Sigma Quality Skills
AIEG QMS
QS 9000
AEC279
SSG100, TCS100
Six Steps to Six Sigma
SSG100, SSG102CD
Concurrent Engineering
TCS
TCS100
Systemic Approach to Problem
Solving
QUA392
Team Oriented Problem Solving
(8D, 7D, 5P)

Core

GBM
GBM
GBM
GBM
BM
BM
M
M

Interpersonal Skills
Communication (oral, written)
AEC722, DDI121
Team Facilitation
DDI170
Coaching and Mentoring
LDR380, PER119
Managing Change
MGT564, MGT124, PDE532
Leadership
MGT561, MGT562, DDI180
Team Building
MGT560, MGT562, EC727, MGT155
Instructional/Teaching
MOT132
Managing Projects
AEC471, MGT839

Statistical Process Characterization
Strategies and Techniques
ENG227
Statistical Inference
MIN101, SPC201

BM
BM

Quality System Review
QUA590
Team Problem Solving NonManufacturing
CES103
Design for Manufacturability

Confidence Intervals
MIN101, SPC201
Probability Concepts and
Distributions
SPC201
Response Surface Methods
QUA393
Screening DOE
QUA391
Advanced Problem Solving
Strategies and Technologies
ENG998
Acceptance Sampling
SPC201
Sample Size Estimation

BM

ENG123, ENG123CD
Financial/Economic Quality Issues

M

BM

M

Quality Function Deployment

M

QUA200A, QUA200B, QUA200C
Total Quality Management

M
M

Benchmarking
BMK220
Product Development Assessment

Robust Design of Processes and
Products

M


Core

GBM

Survival Analysis / Reliability


Six Sigma Black Belt Mentor
Structure
Belt

Sponsorship

Related Projects

Master Black Belt 5 Black Belts

10 / Year

Black Belt

2 Green Belts

4 / Year

Green Belt

Find 1 new Green Belt

2 / Year



Black Belt Roadmap
• Express interest in the program with your
management's approval
• Complete application for candidacy
• Interview for program
• 5-7 Black Belts in Training
• First 4 months 50-60% during training process
starting May 4th
– See detailed Black Belt Roadmap Development Process

• Complete Project assigned (4/year)
• Sponsor 2 Green Belts


Do other companies have Six Sigma
Black Belt Programs?
• GE has very successfully instituted this program
– 4,000 trained Black Belts by YE 1997
– 10,000 trained Black Belts by YE 2000
– “You haven’t much future at GE unless they are selected to
become Black Belts” - Jack Welch

• Kodak has instituted this program
– CEO and COO driven process
– Training includes both written and oral exams
– Minimum requirements: a college education, basic statistics,
presentation skills, computer skills

• Other companies include:
– Allied Signal
– IBM
– Navistar

-Texas Instruments
- ABB
- Citibank


Discussion



The Cost/Quality Relationship
Six Sigma has shown that the
Highest Quality Producer
is also the
Lowest Cost Producer


Results



And the Results?
1997

5.6σ
Products Manufactured

~ 16Billion

1986

4.2σ



11 Year Journey • • 1987 to 1997
FINANCIAL
Sales Up 5.05x
$29.8 Billion in 1997
• An Average Compounded Growth
Rate of 16.9% per Year
Profits Up 6.03x $1.18 Billion in 1997
Stock Up Over 7.0x

QUALITY
Through Defect Elimination
• We have Eliminated > 99.7% of
In-Process Defects
The COPQ (Cost of Poor Quality)
• Reduced > than 84% on a Per Unit
Basis
Manufacturing Cost Savings
• Cumulative Savings over $14 Billion
Employee Productivity
• Increased 3-Fold: A 12% Per Year
Average
Product Reliability
• MTBF • • Increased 5 - 10 Fold

A decade of product quality and productivity


Cost of Poor Quality Elements
• Inspection and Test
• Rework/Repair
• Scrap
• Warranty



The Cost of Poor Quality
16
14

Percent of Sales

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1986


1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997


Companies Adopting the 6σ Culture
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

General Electric
Eastman Kodak
Allied Signal
Texas Instruments
Citibank
Sony
ABB
plus 30 others who have licensed 6σ training

The Future



Six Sigma Renewal
• Six Sigma the Improvement Process
• Drive Quality from the Customer In
• Customer Factory and Field Returns
• 5-Nines Reliability



Hierarchy Of Customer Satisfaction

VI
S

IO

N

Offensive
Strategy

Gain
Customer
Loyalty

Trust

Innovation &
Implementation
Anticipate
Customer Needs

MI
S

Defensive
Strategy

SI
O

N

Exceed
Customer Expectations
Meet
Customer Requirements
Determine Customer
Requirements & Expectations

Meet
Commitments

Identify Customers
by Organization by Key Contacts



Top Box Products and Service
Noncompetitive
Zone

High

Telephone Company

Totally
Satisfied

substitutes
• Dominant brand equity
• High cost of switching
• Powerful Loyalty program
• Proprietary technology

Loyalty

• Regulated monopoly or few

ACCES
Highly Competitive
Zone

Satisfied

Low
Completely
Dissatisfied

• Commoditization or
low differentiation
• Consumer
indifference
• Many substitutes
• Low cost of switching

AECS

Satisfaction

Completely
Satisfied
HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW Nov./Dec. 1995



The Customer Speaks
Customer Loyalty

Percent Satisfied

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

80%

60%

55

38

60

50%
40%
30%

44

20%

40

30

10%

18.1%

19.5%

15.7%

6.5%

5.3%

6.0%

0%

1996
% Satisfied

Would Continue to Use
Motorola in the Future

1997
% Top Box

Definitely Would

Performance Compared to Competitors

Would Recommend
Motorola to Colleagues
Might

Willingness to
Repurchase Products
in the Future
Definitely Would Not

Ease of Doing Business
70%

58.3%

57.4%

63.5%

60%

50%
40.3%

40%

50%

35.9%

40%

30%

31.5%

30%

20%
10%
0%

75.9%

74.0%

70%

1995

60%

79.0%

20%

6.7%
How we rate in Comparison
with the Best Supplier
Much Better/
Very Satisfied


1.4%
How Satisfied is the Customer with
us in Comparison to the Competition
Similar/Somewhat
Satisfied

Much Worse/
Not Satisfied

10%
0%

5.0%
Customer Satisfaction with the Ease of Doing Business
Very Satisfied

Somewhat Satisfied

Not Satisfied


LESSONS
LEARNED



Benchmarking Tells Us
There are no secrets to quality.
There are no “Silver Bullets” or short cuts to
good quality.
Quality doesn’t take time, it saves time.
It is not only free, it pays dividends.
Average company spends close to 25% of its
revenue on waste -- non-value added.
Quality process applies to the administrative
side of business as well.
Service companies are not different from
manufacturing.


A Quality Plan’s Key Requirements






A methodology
A metric
Measure a complete
product/service
Accountability





(Application -- The Customer View)

and ... Reach Out Goals!!!

Actions Required to
Institutionalize a Quality Process
– TOP DOWN COMMITMENT AND INVOLVEMENT
• Set the example, be active in the audit process

– MEASUREMENT SYSTEM TO TRACK PROGRESS
• At both macro and micro levels

– TOUGH GOAL SETTING (REACH OUT!!)
• Benchmark Best-In-Class -- audit often

– PROVIDE THE REQUIRED EDUCATION
• The “Why” and “How To”

– SPREAD THE SUCCESS STORIES


Other Lessons Learned
• Be careful that you don’t get too focused on
winning the metric game.
• Be careful that you don’t loose sight of the
customer’s priorities.
• Be careful that you don’t become arrogant.
• Look at the cost of defects, not just the number.


Quality
is not an Assignable Task
it must be Rooted and Institutionalized
Within every Step of the
“Business Process”
IT IS EVERYONE'S RESPONSIBILITY


Questions ?



Sixsig

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Sixsig

Similaire à Sixsig (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Sixsig

Notes de l'éditeur