Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Its my way or the highway
We all have to deal with "gurus".  Whether 6Sigma or Lean or Ninja "Something".
I'm all about picking the right tool for the problem at hand.  
While I love stats and doing DOEs (Design of Experiments) alas its rarely called for and even rarer Management wants to pay for it in lost work time.

What conflicts between Lean and Six Sigma and QA have you come across?
I see Lean directly feeding and enabling Quality. Without a doubt. From 5S to single piece flow to TPM.

Implementing lean will make your Quality shortcomings painfully obvious very quickly. All that buffer stock you've been carrying to support bad or low first pass yields will stick out like a sore thumb.

You can't do lean with out great quality. And quality loves lean, it drives improvement.

SixSigma is a tool to improve quality, it has a supporting role in both Quality and Lean. It's funny how the drive years ago was 6Sigma and only later lean caught on.
I'm not a huge fan of 6sigma. It has its role, but some companies rely too heavily on it.

5S is rarely overdone, if anything it’s typically way underdone.

Most of my QA conflits come from coworkers with very good intentions, but very little exposure to other companies or ways of working.
Six Sigma is typically a more expensive tool, at least on a project scale, as it is called to demonstrate some ROI right at the start, and that means alot of people in different depts need to spend time on it. The project solutions may also involve expenses as in different tooling, molds, etc. It is a tool for overall long term cost savings through a well thought out and planned approach (yes, I am generalizing here). Lean is a bit of the opposite, cheaper to implement, smaller savings in many projects rather than a large saving in a single project. It also can be 'confined' to one department or operation, rather than involving a cross functional team with a project timeline. I agree 5s in underdone on a regular basis, the first part is easy, it gets progressively more difficult without the proper culture for it to mature.
So far, management I have seen believe that "lean" means "doing more or the same with less people", and I have seen teams 'rewarded' by someone losing their job. This has gone far towards damaging the lean idea from employees perspectives.
I think 6S is just a tool.  It can be useful, but more often, I think the 6S mindset runs directly counter to Quality principles, to the extent that it sometimes feels like it has been consciously adopted in some quarters as a substitute for Quality.

Whatever merits Lean may or may not have, in my experience it's too often seized upon by management as a cover for inadequate resourcing, which of course is detrimental to Quality.  I can agree that lean drives "improvement," but "improvement" is in the eye of the beholder.  I think 6S and lean both tend to encourage a mindset that "improvement" is decided internally, not by the customer.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)