text:
Six Sigma
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Sigma 6.
Part of a series of articles on
Manufacturing
Manufacturing methods
Batch production
Job production
Flow production
Improvement methods
RCM
TPM
VDM
QRM
TOC
Lean
Six Sigma
TQM
ZD
Information and communication
ISA-88
ISA-95
ERP
SAP
IEC 62264
B2MML
Process control
PLC
DCS
SCADA
v
t
e
Six Sigma (6σ) is a set of techniques and tools for process improvement. It was introduced by engineers Bill Smith & Mikel J Harry while working at Motorola in 1986.[1][2] Jack Welch made it central to his business strategy at General Electric in 1995.
It seeks to improve the quality of the output of a process by identifying and removing the causes of defects and minimizing variability in manufacturing and business processes. It uses a set of quality management methods, mainly empirical, statistical methods, and creates a special infrastructure of people within the organization who are experts in these methods. Each Six Sigma project carried out within an organization follows a defined sequence of steps and has specific value targets, for example: reduce process cycle time, reduce pollution, reduce costs, increase customer satisfaction, and increase profits.
The term Six Sigma (capitalized because it was written that way when registered as a Motorola trademark on December 28, 1993) originated from terminology associated with statistical modeling of manufacturing processes. The maturity of a manufacturing process can be described by a sigma rating indicating its yield or the percentage of defect-free products it creates. A six sigma process is one in which 99.99966% of all opportunities to produce some feature of a part are statistically expected to be free of defects (3.4 defective features per million opportunities). Motorola set a goal of "six sigma" for all of its manufacturing operations, and this goal became a by-word for the management and engineering practices used to achieve it.
Contents
[hide]
1 Doctrine
2 Difference between related concepts
3 Methodologies
3.1 DMAIC
3.2 DMADV or DFSS
3.3 Quality management tools and methods
4 Implementation roles
4.1 Certification
5 Etymology of "six sigma process"
6 Role of the 1.5 sigma shift
6.1 Sigma levels
7 Software
8 Application
9 Criticism
9.1 Lack of originality
9.2 Inadequate for complex manufacturing
9.3 Role of consultants
9.4 Potential negative effects
9.4.1 Over-reliance on statistical tools
9.4.2 Stifling creativity in research environments
9.5 Lack of systematic documentation
9.6 1.5 sigma shift
10 See also
11 References
12 Further reading
Doctrine[edit]
The common Six Sigma symbol
Six Sigma doctrine asserts:
Continuous efforts to achieve stable and predictable process results (e.g. by reducing process variation) are of vital importance to business success.
Manufacturing and business processes have characteristics that can be defined, measured, analyzed, improved, and controlled.
Achieving sustained quality improvement requires commitment from the entire organization, particularly from top-level management.
Features that set Six Sigma apart from previous quality-improvement initiatives include:
A clear focus on achieving measurable and quantifiable financial returns from any Six Sigma project.
An increased emphasis on strong and passionate management leadership and support.
A clear commitment to making decisions on the basis of verifiable data and statistical methods, rather than assumptions and guesswork.
The term "six sigma" comes from statistics and is used in statistical quality control, which evaluates process capability. Originally, it referred to the ability of manufacturing processes to produce a very high proportion of output within specification. Processes that operate with "six sigma quality" over the short term are assumed to produce long-term defect levels below 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO).[3][4] Six Sigma's implicit goal is to improve all processes, but not to the 3.4 DPMO level necessarily. Organizations need to determine an appropriate sigma level for each of their most important processes and strive to achieve these. As a result of this goal, it is incumbent on management of the organization to prioritize areas of improvement.
"Six Sigma" was registered June 11, 1991 as U.S. Service Mark 1,647,704. In 2005 Motorola attributed over US$17 billion in savings to Six Sigma.[5]
Other early adopters of Six Sigma include Honeywell and General Electric, where Jack Welch introduced the method.[6] By the late 1990s, about two-thirds of the Fortune 500 organizations had begun Six Sigma initiatives with the aim of reducing costs and improving quality.[7]
In recent years[update], some practitioners have combined Six Sigma ideas with lean manufacturing to create a methodology named Lean Six Sigma.[8] The Lean Six Sigma methodology views lean manufacturing, which addresses process flow and waste issues, and Six Sigma, with its focus on variation and design, as complementary disciplines aimed at promoting "business and operational excellence".[8] Companies such as GE,[9] Accenture, Verizon, GENPACT, and IBM use Lean Six Sigma to focus transformation efforts not just on efficiency but also on growth. It serves as a foundation for innovation throughout the organization, from manufacturing and software development to sales and service delivery functions.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has published in 2011 the first standard "ISO 13053:2011" defining a Six Sigma process.[10] Other "standards" are created mostly by universities or companies that have so-called first-party certification programs for Six Sigma.
Difference between related concepts[edit]
Lean management and Six Sigma are two concepts which share similar methodologies and tools. Both programs are Japanese influenced, but they are two different programs. Lean management is focused on eliminating waste and ensuring efficiency while Six Sigma's focus is on eliminating defects and reducing variability.
Methodologies[edit]
Six Sigma projects follow two project methodologies inspired by Deming's Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle. These methodologies, composed of five phases each, bear the acronyms DMAIC and DMADV.[7]
DMAIC ("duh-may-ick", /dʌ.ˈmeɪ.ɪk/) is used for projects aimed at improving an existing business process.[7]
DMADV ("duh-mad-vee", /dʌ.ˈmæd.vi/) is used for projects aimed at creating new product or process designs.[7]
DMAIC[edit]
The five steps of DMAIC
Main article: DMAIC
The DMAIC project methodology has five phases:
Define the system, the voice of the customer and their requirements, and the project goals, specifically.
Measure key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data; calculate the 'as-is' Process Capability.
Analyze the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships. Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation.
Improve or optimize the current process based upon data analysis using techniques such as design of experiments, poka yoke or mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new, future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability.
Control the future state process to ensure that any deviations from the target are corrected before they result in defects. Implement control systems such as statistical process control, production boards, visual workplaces, and continuously monitor the process. This process is repeated until the desired quality level is obtained.
Some organizations add a Recognize step at the beginning, which is to recognize the right problem to work on, thus yielding an RDMAIC methodology.[11]
DMADV or DFSS[edit]
The five steps of DMADV
Main article: DFSS
The DMADV project methodology, known as DFSS ("Design For Six Sigma"),[7] features five phases:
Define design goals that are consistent with customer demands and the enterprise strategy.
Measure and identify CTQs (characteristics that are Critical To Quality), measure product capabilities, production process capability, and measure risks.
Analyze to develop and design alternatives
Design an improved alternative, best suited per analysis in the previous step
Verify the design, set up pilot runs, implement the production process and hand it over to the process owner(s).
Quality management tools and methods[edit]
Within the individual phases of a DMAIC or DMADV project, Six Sigma utilizes many established quality-management tools that are also used outside Six Sigma. The following table shows an overview of the main methods used.
5 Whys
Statistical and fitting tools
Analysis of variance
General linear model
ANOVA Gauge R&R
Regression analysis
Correlation
Scatter diagram
Chi-squared test
Axiomatic design
Business Process Mapping/Check sheet
Cause & effects diagram (also known as fishbone or Ishikawa diagram)
Control chart/Control plan (also known as a swimlane map)/Run charts
Cost-benefit analysis
CTQ tree
Design of experiments/Stratification
Histograms/Pareto analysis/Pareto chart
Pick chart/Process capability/Rolled throughput yield
Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
Quantitative marketing research through use of Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) systems
Root cause analysis
SIPOC analysis (Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Customers)
COPIS analysis (Customer centric version/perspective of SIPOC)
Taguchi methods/Taguchi Loss Function
Value stream mapping
Implementation roles[edit]
One key innovation of Six Sigma involves the absolute "professionalizing" of quality management functions. Prior to Six Sigma, quality management in practice was largely relegated to the production floor and to statisticians in a separate quality department. Formal Six Sigma programs adopt a kind of elite ranking terminology (similar to some martial arts systems, like judo) to define a hierarchy (and special career path) that includes all business functions and levels.
Six Sigma identifies several key roles for its successful implementation.[12]
Executive Leadership includes the CEO and other members of top management. They are responsible for setting up a vision for Six Sigma implementation. They also empower the other role holders with the freedom and resources to explore new ideas for breakthrough improvements by transcending departmental barriers and overcoming inherent resistance to change.[13]
Champions take responsibility for Six Sigma implementation across the organization in an integrated manner. The Executive Leadership draws them from upper management. Champions also act as mentors to Black Belts.
Master Black Belts, identified by Champions, act as in-house coaches on Six Sigma. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma. They assist Champions and guide Black Belts and Green Belts. Apart from statistical tasks, they spend their time on ensuring consistent application of Six Sigma across various functions and departments.
Black Belts operate under Master Black Belts to apply Six Sigma methodology to specific projects. They devote 100% of their valued time to Six Sigma. They primarily focus on Six Sigma project execution and special leadership with special tasks, whereas Champions and Master Black Belts focus on identifying projects/functions for Six Sigma.
Green Belts are the employees who take up Six Sigma implementation along with their other job responsibilities, operating under the guidance of Black Belts.
According to proponents of the system, special training is needed[14] for all of these practitioners to ensure that they follow the methodology and use the data-driven approach correctly.
Some organizations use additional belt colours, such as Yellow Belts, for employees that have basic training in Six Sigma tools and generally participate in projects and "White belts" for those locally trained in the concepts but do not participate in the project team. "Orange belts" are also mentioned to be used for special cases.[15]
Certification[edit]
Main article: List of Six Sigma certification organizations
General Electric and Motorola developed certification programs as part of their Six Sigma implementation, verifying individuals' command of the Six Sigma methods at the relevant skill level (Green Belt, Black Belt etc.). Following this approach, many organizations in the 1990s started offering Six Sigma certifications to their employees.[7][16] Criteria for Green Belt and Black Belt certification vary; some companies simply require participation in a course and a Six Sigma project.[16] There is no standard certification body, and different certification services are offered by various quality associations and other providers against a fee.[17][18] The American Society for Quality for example requires Black Belt applicants to pass a written exam and to provide a signed affidavit stating that they have completed two projects or one project combined with three years' practical experience in the body of knowledge.[16][19]
Etymology of "six sigma process"[edit]
The term "six sigma process" comes from the notion that if one has six standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit, as shown in the graph, practically no[not in citation given] items will fail to meet specifications.[3] This is based on the calculation method employed in process capability studies.
Capability studies measure the number of standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in sigma units, represented by the Greek letter σ (sigma). As process standard deviation goes up, or the mean of the process moves away from the center of the tolerance, fewer standard deviations will fit between the mean and the nearest specification limit, decreasing the sigma number and increasing the likelihood of items outside specification. One should also note that calculation of Sigma levels for a process data is independent of the data being normally distributed. In one of the criticisms to Six Sigma, practitioners using this approach spend a lot of time transforming data from non-normal to normal using transformation techniques. It must be said that Sigma levels can be determined for process data that has evidence of non-normality.[3]
Graph of the normal distribution, which underlies the statistical assumptions of the Six Sigma model. In the centre at 0, the Greek letter µ (mu) marks the mean, with the horizontal axis showing distance from the mean, marked in standard deviations and given the letter σ (sigma). The greater the standard deviation, the greater is the spread of values encountered. For the green curve shown above, µ = 0 and σ = 1. The upper and lower specification limits (marked USL and LSL) are at a distance of 6σ from the mean. Because of the properties of the normal distribution, values lying that far away from the mean are extremely unlikely: approximately 1 in a billion too low, and the same too high. Even if the mean were to move right or left by 1.5σ at some point in the future (1.5 sigma shift, coloured red and blue), there is still a good safety cushion. This is why Six Sigma aims to have processes where the mean is at least 6σ away from the nearest specification limit.
Role of the 1.5 sigma shift[edit]
Experience has shown that processes usually do not perform as well in the long term as they do in the short term.[3] As a result, the number of sigmas that will fit between the process mean and the nearest specification limit may well drop over time, compared to an initial short-term study.[3] To account for this real-life increase in process variation over time, an empirically based 1.5 sigma shift is introduced into the calculation.[3][20] According to this idea, a process that fits 6 sigma between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in a short-term study will in the long term fit only 4.5 sigma – either because the process mean will move over time, or because the long-term standard deviation of the process will be greater than that observed in the short term, or both.[3]
Hence the widely accepted definition of a six sigma process is a process that produces 3.4 defective parts per million opportunities (DPMO). This is based on the fact that a process that is normally distributed will have 3.4 parts per million outside the limits, when the limits are six sigma from the "original" mean of zero and the process mean is then shifted by 1.5 sigma (and therefore, the six sigma limits are no longer symmetrical about the mean).[3] The former six sigma distribution, when under the effect of the 1.5 sigma shift, is commonly referred to as a 4.5 sigma process. However, it should be noted that the failure rate of a six sigma distribution with the mean shifted 1.5 sigma is not equivalent to the failure rate of a 4.5 sigma process with the mean centered on zero.[3] This allows for the fact that special causes may result in a deterioration in process performance over time and is designed to prevent underestimation of the defect levels likely to be encountered in real-life operation.[3]
The role of the sigma shift is mainly academic. The purpose of six sigma is to generate organizational performance improvement. It is up to the organization to determine, based on customer expectations, what the appropriate sigma level of a process is. The purpose of the sigma value is as a comparative figure to determine whether a process is improving, deteriorating, stagnant or non-competitive with others in the same business. Six sigma (3.4 DPMO) is not the goal of all processes.
Sigma levels[edit]
A control chart depicting a process that experienced a 1.5 sigma drift in the process mean toward the upper specification limit starting at midnight. Control charts are used to maintain 6 sigma quality by signaling when quality professionals should investigate a process to find and eliminate special-cause variation.
See also: Three sigma rule
The table below gives long-term DPMO values corresponding to various short-term sigma levels.[21][22]
These figures assume that the process mean will shift by 1.5 sigma toward the side with the critical specification limit. In other words, they assume that after the initial study determining the short-term sigma level, the long-term Cpk value will turn out to be 0.5 less than the short-term Cpk value. So, for example, the DPMO figure given for 1 sigma assumes that the long-term process mean will be 0.5 sigma beyond the specification limit (Cpk = –0.17), rather than 1 sigma within it, as it was in the short-term study (Cpk = 0.33). Note that the defect percentages indicate only defects exceeding the specification limit to which the process mean is nearest. Defects beyond the far specification limit are not included in the percentages.
The formula used here to calculate the DPMO is thus
D P M O = 1 , 000 , 000 ⋅ ( 1 − ϕ ( l e v e l − 1.5 ) ) {\displaystyle DPMO=1,000,000\centerdot (1-\phi (level-1.5))}
Sigma level
Sigma (with 1.5σ shift)
DPMO
Percent defective
Percentage yield
Short-term Cpk
Long-term Cpk
1 −0.5 691,462 69% 31% 0.33 −0.17
2 0.5 308,538 31% 69% 0.67 0.17
3 1.5 66,807 6.7% 93.3% 1.00 0.5
4 2.5 6,210 0.62% 99.38% 1.33 0.83
5 3.5 233 0.023% 99.977% 1.67 1.17
6 4.5 3.4 0.00034% 99.99966% 2.00 1.5
7 5.5 0.019 0.0000019% 99.9999981% 2.33 1.83
Software[edit]
Main article: List of Six Sigma software packages
Application[edit]
Main article: List of Six Sigma companies
Six Sigma mostly finds application in large organizations.[23] An important factor in the spread of Six Sigma was GE's 1998 announcement of $350 million in savings thanks to Six Sigma, a figure that later grew to more than $1 billion.[23] According to industry consultants like Thomas Pyzdek and John Kullmann, companies with fewer than 500 employees are less suited to Six Sigma implementation or need to adapt the standard approach to make it work for them.[23] Six Sigma however contains a large number of tools and techniques that work well in small to mid-size organizations. The fact that an organization is not big enough to be able to afford Black Belts does not diminish its abilities to make improvements using this set of tools and techniques. The infrastructure described as necessary to support Six Sigma is a result of the size of the organization rather than a requirement of Six Sigma itself.[23]
Criticism[edit]
Lack of originality[edit]
Quality expert Joseph M. Juran described Six Sigma as "a basic version of quality improvement", stating that "there is nothing new there. It includes what we used to call facilitators. They've adopted more flamboyant terms, like belts with different colors. I think that concept has merit to set apart, to create specialists who can be very helpful. Again, that's not a new idea. The American Society for Quality long ago established certificates, such as for reliability engineers."[24]
Inadequate for complex manufacturing[edit]
Quality expert Philip B. Crosby pointed out that the Six Sigma standard doesn't go far enough[25]—customers deserve defect-free products every time. For example, under the Six Sigma standard, semiconductors which require the flawless etching of millions of tiny circuits onto a single chip are all defective, he claims.[26]
Role of consultants[edit]
The use of "Black Belts" as itinerant change agents has fostered an industry of training and certification. Critics have argued there is overselling of Six Sigma by too great a number of consulting firms, many of which claim expertise in Six Sigma when they have only a rudimentary understanding of the tools and techniques involved or the markets or industries in which they are acting.[27]
Potential negative effects[edit]
A Fortune article stated that "of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent have trailed the S&P 500 since". The statement was attributed to "an analysis by Charles Holland of consulting firm Qualpro (which espouses a competing quality-improvement process)".[28] The summary of the article is that Six Sigma is effective at what it is intended to do, but that it is "narrowly designed to fix an existing process" and does not help in "coming up with new products or disruptive technologies."[29][30]
Over-reliance on statistical tools[edit]
A more direct criticism is the "rigid" nature of Six Sigma with its over-reliance on methods and tools. In most cases, more attention is paid to reducing variation and searching for any significant factors and less attention is paid to developing robustness in the first place (which can altogether eliminate the need for reducing variation).[31] The extensive reliance on significance testing and use of multiple regression techniques increases the risk of making commonly unknown types of statistical errors or mistakes. A possible consequence of Six Sigma's array of P-value misconceptions is the false belief that the probability of a conclusion being in error can be calculated from the data in a single experiment without reference to external evidence or the plausibility of the underlying mechanism.[32] One of the most serious but all-too-common misuses of inferential statistics is to take a model that was developed through exploratory model building and subject it to the same sorts of statistical tests that are used to validate a model that was specified in advance.[33]
Another comment refers to the often mentioned Transfer Function, which seems to be a flawed theory if looked at in detail.[34] Since significance tests were first popularized many objections have been voiced by prominent and respected statisticians. The volume of criticism and rebuttal has filled books with language seldom used in the scholarly debate of a dry subject.[35][36][37][38] Much of the first criticism was already published more than 40 years ago. Refer to: Statistical hypothesis testing#Criticism for details.
Articles featuring critics have appeared in the November–December 2006 issue of USA Army Logistician regarding Six-Sigma: "The dangers of a single paradigmatic orientation (in this case, that of technical rationality) can blind us to values associated with double-loop learning and the learning organization, organization adaptability, workforce creativity and development, humanizing the workplace, cultural awareness, and strategy making."[39]
Nassim Nicholas Taleb considers risk managers little more than "blind users" of statistical tools and methods.[40] He states that statistics is fundamentally incomplete as a field as it cannot predict the risk of rare events — something Six Sigma is specially concerned with. Furthermore, errors in prediction are likely to occur as a result of ignorance for or distinction between epistemic and other uncertainties. These errors are the biggest in time variant (reliability) related failures.[41]
Stifling creativity in research environments[edit]
According to an article by John Dodge, editor in chief of Design News, use of Six Sigma is inappropriate in a research environment. Dodge states[42] "excessive metrics, steps, measurements and Six Sigma's intense focus on reducing variability water down the discovery process. Under Six Sigma, the free-wheeling nature of brainstorming and the serendipitous side of discovery is stifled." He concludes "there's general agreement that freedom in basic or pure research is preferable while Six Sigma works best in incremental innovation when there's an expressed commercial goal."
A BusinessWeek article says that James McNerney's introduction of Six Sigma at 3M had the effect of stifling creativity and reports its removal from the research function. It cites two Wharton School professors who say that Six Sigma leads to incremental innovation at the expense of blue skies research.[43] This phenomenon is further explored in the book Going Lean, which describes a related approach known as lean dynamics and provides data to show that Ford's "6 Sigma" program did little to change its fortunes.[44]
Lack of systematic documentation[edit]
One criticism voiced by Yasar Jarrar and Andy Neely from the Cranfield School of Management's Centre for Business Performance is that while Six Sigma is a powerful approach, it can also unduly dominate an organization's culture; and they add that much of the Six Sigma literature – in a remarkable way (six-sigma claims to be evidence, scientifically based) – lacks academic rigor:
One final criticism, probably more to the Six Sigma literature than concepts, relates to the evidence for Six Sigma’s success. So far, documented case studies using the Six Sigma methods are presented as the strongest evidence for its success. However, looking at these documented cases, and apart from a few that are detailed from the experience of leading organizations like GE and Motorola, most cases are not documented in a systemic or academic manner. In fact, the majority are case studies illustrated on websites, and are, at best, sketchy. They provide no mention of any specific Six Sigma methods that were used to resolve the problems. It has been argued that by relying on the Six Sigma criteria, management is lulled into the idea that something is being done about quality, whereas any resulting improvement is accidental (Latzko 1995). Thus, when looking at the evidence put forward for Six Sigma success, mostly by consultants and people with vested interests, the question that begs to be asked is: are we making a true improvement with Six Sigma methods or just getting skilled at telling stories? Everyone seems to believe that we are making true improvements, but there is some way to go to document these empirically and clarify the causal relations.
—  [31]
1.5 sigma shift[edit]
The statistician Donald J. Wheeler has dismissed the 1.5 sigma shift as "goofy" because of its arbitrary nature.[45] Its universal applicability is seen as doubtful.
The 1.5 sigma shift has also become contentious because it results in stated "sigma levels" that reflect short-term rather than long-term performance: a process that has long-term defect levels corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance is, by Six Sigma convention, described as a "six sigma process."[3][46] The accepted Six Sigma scoring system thus cannot be equated to actual normal distribution probabilities for the stated number of standard deviations, and this has been a key bone of contention over how Six Sigma measures are defined.[46] The fact that it is rarely explained that a "6 sigma" process will have long-term defect rates corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance rather than actual 6 sigma performance has led several commentators to express the opinion that Six Sigma is a confidence trick.[3]
See also[edit]
Design for Six Sigma
DMAIC
Kaizen – a philosophical focus on continuous improvement of processes
Lean Six Sigma
Lean Manufacturing
Management fad
Total productive maintenance
Total quality management
W. Edwards Deming
References[edit]
Jump up ^ "The Inventors of Six Sigma". Archived from the original on 2005-11-06. Retrieved 2006-01-29.
Jump up ^ Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services. Gower Publishing, Ltd. p. 6. ISBN 0-566-08374-4.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services. Gower Publishing, Ltd. p. 25. ISBN 0-566-08374-4.
Jump up ^ "Motorola University Six Sigma Dictionary". Archived from the original on 2006-01-28. Retrieved 2006-01-29.
Jump up ^ "About Motorola University". Archived from the original on 2005-12-22. Retrieved 2006-01-28.
Jump up ^ "Six Sigma: Where is it now?". Retrieved 2008-05-22.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f De Feo, Joseph A.; Barnard, William (2005). JURAN Institute's Six Sigma Breakthrough and Beyond – Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. ISBN 0-07-059881-9.
^ Jump up to: a b Walshe, Kieran; Harvey, Gill; Jas, Pauline (15 November 2010). Connecting Knowledge and Performance in Public Services: From Knowing to Doing. Cambridge University Press. p. 175. ISBN 978-0-521-19546-1. Retrieved 2011-08-22.
Jump up ^ "verizon".
Jump up ^ "ISO 13053:2011". ISO.
Jump up ^ Webber, Larry; Wallace, Michael (15 December 2006). Quality Control for Dummies. For Dummies. pp. 42–43. ISBN 978-0-470-06909-7. Retrieved 2012-05-16.
Jump up ^ Harry, Mikel; Schroeder, Richard (2000). Six Sigma. Random House, Inc. ISBN 0-385-49437-8.
Jump up ^ "Six sigma support from upper management". 6sigma.us. Retrieved March 11, 2015.
Jump up ^ Bertels, Thomas (2003) Rath & Strong's Six Sigma Leadership Handbook. John Wiley and Sons. pp 57–83 ISBN 0-471-25124-0.
Jump up ^ Harry, Mikel J.; Mann, Prem S.; De Hodgins, Ofelia C.; Hulbert, Richard L.; Lacke, Christopher J. (20 September 2011). Practitioner's Guide to Statistics and Lean Six Sigma for Process Improvements. John Wiley and Sons. pp. 30–. ISBN 978-1-118-21021-5. Retrieved 2011-11-15.
^ Jump up to: a b c Keller, Paul A.; Keller, Paul (16 December 2010). Six Sigma Demystified. McGraw-Hill Professional. p. 40. ISBN 978-0-07-174679-3. Retrieved 2011-09-20.
Jump up ^ Webber, Larry; Wallace, Michael (15 December 2006). Quality Control for Dummies. For Dummies. pp. 292–. ISBN 978-0-470-06909-7. Retrieved 2011-09-20.
Jump up ^ Coryea, R. Leroy; Cordy, Carl E.; Coryea, LeRoy R. (27 January 2006). Champion's Practical Six Sigma Summary. Xlibris Corporation. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-4134-9681-9. Retrieved 2011-09-20.
Jump up ^ "Certification – ASQ". Milwaukee, Wisconsin: American Society for Quality. Retrieved 2011-09-09.
Jump up ^ Harry, Mikel J. (1988). The Nature of six sigma quality. Rolling Meadows, Illinois: Motorola University Press. p. 25. ISBN 978-1-56946-009-2.
Jump up ^ Gygi, Craig; DeCarlo, Neil; Williams, Bruce (2005). Six Sigma for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing, Inc. pp. Front inside cover, 23. ISBN 0-7645-6798-5.
Jump up ^ El-Haik, Basem; Suh, Nam P. Axiomatic Quality. John Wiley and Sons. p. 10. ISBN 978-0-471-68273-8.
^ Jump up to: a b c d Dusharme, Dirk. "Six Sigma Survey: Breaking Through the Six Sigma Hype". Quality Digest.
Jump up ^ Paton, Scott M. (August 2002). "Juran: A Lifetime of Quality". Quality Digest. 22 (8): 19–23. Retrieved 2009-04-01.
Jump up ^ Crosby, Philip B. (1999). Quality and Me: Lessons from an Evolving Life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. p. 159. OCLC 40444566. Quality is measured by the price of nonconformance, not by indexes.
Jump up ^ Crosby, Philip B. (1996). Quality Is Still Free: Making Quality Certain in Uncertain Times. New York: McGraw-Hill. p. xiv. OCLC 32820340. The nonconformance situation semiconductor suppliers found recently emerged from embracing the standard of "Six Sigma." This permits 3.4 defects per million components. Why anyone would want to do that is beyond me. But they are now paying the price. When even ordinary chips contain a million or more components, such a standard means that they are all defective.
Jump up ^ Lean Six Sigma: Cost Reduction Strategies, Ade Asefeso MCIPS MBA (2012)
Jump up ^ Morris, Betsy (11 July 2006). "Tearing up the Jack Welch playbook". Fortune. Retrieved 2006-11-26.
Jump up ^ Richardson, Karen (7 January 2007). "The 'Six Sigma' Factor for Home Depot". Wall Street Journal Online. Retrieved 2007-10-15.
Jump up ^ Ficalora, Joe; Costello, Joe. "Wall Street Journal SBTI Rebuttal" (PDF). Sigma Breakthrough Technologies, Inc. Retrieved 2007-10-15.
^ Jump up to: a b "Six Sigma Friend or Foe" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-02-10.
Jump up ^ "Twelve P value misconceptions" (PDF).
Jump up ^ "important".
Jump up ^ "y-FX".
Jump up ^ Harlow, Lisa Lavoie; Stanley A. Mulaik; James H. Steiger, eds. (1997). What If There Were No Significance Tests?. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN 978-0-8058-2634-0.
Jump up ^ Morrison, Denton; Henkel, Ramon, eds. (2006) [1970]. The Significance Test Controversy. AldineTransaction. ISBN 0-202-30879-0.
Jump up ^ McCloskey, Deirdre N.; Ziliak, Stephen T. (2008). The Cult of Statistical Significance: How the Standard Error Costs Us Jobs, Justice, and Lives. University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0-472-05007-9.
Jump up ^ Chow, Siu L. (1997). Statistical Significance: Rationale, Validity and Utility. ISBN 0-7619-5205-5.
Jump up ^ Paparone, Dr. Christopher R. "Army Logistician (A Values-Based Critique of Lean and Six Sigma as a Management Ideology)". Almc.army.mil. Retrieved 2012-02-10.
Jump up ^ The fourth quadrant: a map of the limits of statistics [9.15.08] Nassim Nicholas Taleb, An Edge Original Essay
Jump up ^ "Special Workshop on Risk Acceptance and Risk Communication" (PDF). Stanford University. 26–27 March 2007.
Jump up ^ Dodge, John (10 December 2007). "3M Shelves Six Sigma in R&D". Design News. Retrieved 2013-04-02.
Jump up ^ Hindo, Brian (6 June 2007). "At 3M, a struggle between efficiency and creativity". Business Week. Retrieved 2007-06-06.
Jump up ^ Ruffa, Stephen A. (2008). Going Lean: How the Best Companies Apply Lean Manufacturing Principles to Shatter Uncertainty, Drive Innovation, and Maximize Profits. AMACOM (a division of American Management Association). ISBN 0-8144-1057-X.
Jump up ^ Wheeler, Donald J. (2004). The Six Sigma Practitioner's Guide to Data Analysis. SPC Press. p. 307. ISBN 978-0-945320-62-3.
^ Jump up to: a b * Pande, Peter S.; Neuman, Robert P.; Cavanagh, Roland R. (2001). The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. p. 229. ISBN 0-07-135806-4.
Further reading[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Six Sigma.
Wikiquote has quotations related to: Six Sigma
Adams, Cary W.; Gupta, Praveen; Wilson, Charles E. (2003). Six Sigma Deployment. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 0-7506-7523-3. OCLC 50693105.
Breyfogle, Forrest W. III (1999). Implementing Six Sigma: Smarter Solutions Using Statistical Methods. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-471-26572-1. OCLC 50606471.
De Feo, Joseph A.; Barnard, William (2005). JURAN Institute's Six Sigma Breakthrough and Beyond – Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional. ISBN 0-07-142227-7. OCLC 52937531.
Hahn, G. J., Hill, W. J., Hoerl, R. W. and Zinkgraf, S. A. (1999) The Impact of Six Sigma Improvement-A Glimpse into the Future of Statistics, The American Statistician, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 208–215.
Keller, Paul A. (2001). Six Sigma Deployment: A Guide for Implementing Six Sigma in Your Organization. Tucson, AZ: Quality Publishing. ISBN 0-930011-84-8. OCLC 47942384.
Pande, Peter S.; Neuman, Robert P.; Cavanagh, Roland R. (2001). The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional. ISBN 0-07-135806-4. OCLC 647006794.
Pyzdek, Thomas & Paul A. Keller (2009). The Six Sigma Handbook, Third Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-162338-8. OCLC 51194565.
Snee, Ronald D.; Hoerl, Roger W. (2002). Leading Six Sigma: A Step-by-Step Guide Based on Experience with GE and Other Six Sigma Companies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press. ISBN 0-13-008457-3. OCLC 51048423.
Taylor, Gerald (2008). Lean Six Sigma Service Excellence: A Guide to Green Belt Certification and Bottom Line Improvement. New York, NY: J. Ross Publishing. ISBN 978-1-60427-006-8. OCLC 271773742.
Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services. Aldershot, UK: Gower Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 0-566-08374-4. OCLC 44391556.
[hide]
v
t
e
Six Sigma tools
Define phase
Project charter
Voice of the customer
Value stream mapping
Measure phase
Business process mapping
Process capability
Pareto chart
Analyse phase
Root cause analysis
Failure mode and effects analysis
Multi-vari chart
Improve phase
Design of experiments
Kaizen
Control phase
Control plan
Statistical process control
5S
Poka-yoke
DMAIC
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Six_Sigma&oldid=804500258"
Categories:
Six Sigma
Business terms
Process management
Production and manufacturing
Quality management
1986 introductions
Hidden categories:
Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2009
All articles containing potentially dated statements
All articles with failed verification
Articles with failed verification from November 2014
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Wikiquote
Languages
العربية
Azərbaycanca
Български
Bosanski
Català
Čeština
Deutsch
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
한국어
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
ಕನ್ನಡ
Lietuvių
Magyar
മലയാളം
मराठी
Монгол
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk
Polski
Português
Русский
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
తెలుగు
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 9 October 2017, at 12:22.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: id class style

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/Sigma_6_(disambiguation)
mw-redirect mw-disambig
Sigma 6 (disambiguation)

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: th

values: /wiki/File:Factory.svg image Mill

values:
/wiki/Flow_production
mw-redirect
Flow production

values:
/wiki/Reliability_centered_maintenance
mw-redirect
Reliability centered maintenance

values:
/wiki/Value_driven_maintenance
mw-redirect
Value driven maintenance

values:
/wiki/Quick_Response_Manufacturing
mw-redirect
Quick Response Manufacturing

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: Bill Smith & Mikel J Harry (Motorola engineers) (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Statistical_quality_control
mw-redirect
Statistical quality control

values:
plainlinks noprint asof-tag update
display:none;

values: Edit section: Difference between related concepts

values: Representation in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)

values:
/wiki/Control_systems
mw-redirect
Control systems

values: Edit section: Quality management tools and methods

values:
/wiki/ANOVA_Gauge_R%26R
mw-redirect
ANOVA Gauge R&R

values:
/wiki/Scatter_diagram
mw-redirect
Scatter diagram

values:
/wiki/Business_Process_Mapping
mw-redirect
Business Process Mapping

values:
/wiki/Cost-benefit_analysis
mw-redirect
Cost-benefit analysis

values:
/wiki/Quality_Function_Deployment
mw-redirect
Quality Function Deployment

values:
/wiki/Enterprise_Feedback_Management
mw-redirect
Enterprise Feedback Management

values:
/wiki/Taguchi_Loss_Function
mw-redirect
Taguchi Loss Function

values: div-col columns column-count column-count-2

values: -moz-column-count: 2; -webkit-column-count: 2; column-count: 2;

values: List of Six Sigma certification organizations

values: Edit section: Etymology of "six sigma process"

values: The material near this tag failed verification of its source citation(s). (November 2014)

values: margin-left: auto; margin-right:auto; overflow:hidden; width:auto; max-width:508px;

values: Edit section: Role of the 1.5 sigma shift

values:
/wiki/Common-cause_and_special-cause
mw-redirect
Common-cause and special-cause

values:
/wiki/Three_sigma_rule
mw-redirect
Three sigma rule

values: vertical-align: -0.838ex; width:42.692ex; height:2.843ex;

values: Edit section: Inadequate for complex manufacturing

values: Edit section: Potential negative effects

values: Edit section: Over-reliance on statistical tools

values:
/wiki/Cultural_competence
mw-redirect
Cultural competence

values: Edit section: Stifling creativity in research environments

values: Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

values: Edit section: Lack of systematic documentation

values:
/wiki/Lean_Manufacturing
mw-redirect
Lean Manufacturing

values:
/wiki/Wiley_Publishing,_Inc.
mw-redirect
Wiley Publishing, Inc.

values:
/wiki/John_Wiley_and_Sons
mw-redirect
John Wiley and Sons

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/40444566

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/32820340

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/50693105

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/50606471

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/52937531

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/47942384

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/647006794

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/51194565

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/51048423

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/271773742

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/44391556

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2009

values: Category:All articles containing potentially dated statements

values: Category:All articles with failed verification

values: Category:Articles with failed verification from November 2014

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Six_Sigma
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: حيود سداسي – Arabic

values: Шест сигма – Bulgarian

values:
https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sis_sigma
Sis sigma – Catalan
ca
ca
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – Czech
cs
cs
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – German
de
de
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sei_Sigma
Sei Sigma – Basque
eu
eu
interlanguage-link-target

values: شش سیگما – Persian

values:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – French
fr
fr
interlanguage-link-target

values: सिक्स सिग्मा – Hindi

values:
https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – Indonesian
id
id
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sei_Sigma
Sei Sigma – Italian
it
it
interlanguage-link-target

values: שש סיגמא – Hebrew

values:
https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – Lithuanian
lt
lt
interlanguage-link-target

values: സിക്സ് സിഗ്മ സർട്ടിഫിക്കേഷൻ – Malayalam

values: सिक्स सिग्मा – Marathi

values: Зургаан сигма – Mongolian

values:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – Dutch
nl
nl
interlanguage-link-target

values: シックス・シグマ – Japanese

values:
https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma
Six Sigma – Norwegian
no
no
interlanguage-link-target

values: Шесть сигм – Russian

values:
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_Sigma
6 Sigma – Finnish
fi
fi
interlanguage-link-target

values:
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_Sigma
Sex Sigma – Swedish
sv
sv
interlanguage-link-target

values: சிக்ஸ் சிக்மா – Tamil

values: సిక్స్ సిగ్మా – Telugu

values: ซิกส์ซิกมา – Thai

values: Шість сигма – Ukrainian

values:
https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_Sigma
6 Sigma – Vietnamese
vi
vi
interlanguage-link-target

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Six_Sigma rootpage-Six_Sigma vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view