<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Six Sigma Blogs at the iSixSigma Blogosphere</title>
		<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/RSS2.asp?action=full</link>
		<description>Six Sigma Blogs at the iSixSigma Blogosphere</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2004-2009 iSixSigma</copyright>
		<managingEditor>blogosphere@isixsigma.com</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>blogosphere@isixsigma.com</webMaster>
		<generator>iSixSigma Blog 1.0.5</generator>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:06:08 -0800</lastBuildDate>
    	<ttl>60</ttl>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: A Spoonful of Sugar]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/a_spoonful_of_sugar.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've been thinking a lot lately about resistance to change.  The Rogers Adoption / Innovation curve (innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards) is referenced in some form by most people involved in change management.
Now, I'm not an innovator myself.  My special form of creativity doesn't manifest itself by coming up with new ideas that no one else has thought of, or completely new ways to do things.  I'd tag myself as being in the early adopter or maybe early majority categories most of the time.
So it can be a stretch for me to work with the late majority or laggards.  "Don't you know this will be good for you?" I ask incredulously.  "Can't you see all the benefits and advantages that you will have once you've made this change?"  I confess that I get very impatient sometimes.
Fortunately I have great team members that a) calm me down and prevent me from sending career-limiting emails, and b) remind me that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.  Or, as the movie musical "Mary Poppins" character sings, "Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down."
(Of course, as she's singing that, she's snapping her fingers and making the children's clothes go back into the drawers without any effort on anyone's part.)
But in the real world, it's good to ask ourselves what's in it for the stakeholders, and try to see what would make the change more palatable.  The trick is, it has to been seen as a value-added return even before the gains are realized.  For example, a promise that the work will be easier might not be believed, even if you know it will be true.
Have you found a good way to engage stakeholders who might need a little extra encouragement to buy into a change plan?  It would be most helpful if you would share your experiences!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:20:37 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Who Should Be in the Hall of Fame?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/who_should_be_in_the_hall_of_fame.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Last year, we celebrated Bill Smith, widely known as the Father of Six Sigma, as the first inductee into iSixSigma’s Six Sigma Hall of Fame. We’re now identifying who should be the next person to join the Hall of Fame – someone who has made significant and lasting contributions in the Lean Six Sigma industry, who has consistently fueled corporate growth and shareholder value through the use of Lean Six Sigma during their career, who has commanded the respect and admiration of their peers for their extraordinary service to the industry. 
Help us decide who will be inducted in the Six Sigma Hall of Fame in 2010. Submit your nomination via email to sshof(at)isixsigma.com by Nov. 30.
Inductees will be announced at the upcoming iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards, Miami Feb. 1 – 4, 2010, along with the winners of the Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Projects, and Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:36:31 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Thank You, Six Sigma Community]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/thank_you_six_sigma_community.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Dear iSixSigma Blogosphere Readers,
Back in January 2005, I started up a little blog about Six Sigma companies.  It caught the eye of iSixSigma’s very own Mike Cyger and he invited me to join his growing team of forward thinking Six Sigma zealots dedicated to providing the best information about Six Sigma to the masses. 
As an active user of iSixSigma since 2001, working for the company was like being a roadie for my favorite band. Living and breathing Six Sigma.  
I’ve been associated with the Six Sigma industry for nearly a decade and have met some of the world’s finest people in this community. To you, I give my deepest thanks for all you have taught me. My journey to this point has been fantastic. 
But alas, it is time for me to move on. I have the chance to follow a dream of mine, and I cannot let the opportunity pass me. 
I will remain active with iSixSigma over the next several weeks transitioning my role. I will continue to keep up with the industry and look forward to keeping in touch with you in the future. I can be reached via LinkedIn.  
Best,
Michael Marx]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:51:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Scope Creep]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/scope_creep.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2010 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:22:20 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: 100 Reasons to Embrace Six Sigma]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/100_reasons_to_embrace_six_sigma.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Having recently posted my 100th  blog, I thought it would be worth-while to share my list of 100 reasons why companies should embrace Six Sigma  . . .
Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . .   Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . .   Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers . . . Customers 
Any questions?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 13:09:58 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Psychology of Awards]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_psychology_of_awards.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There’s a definite honor in being “award-winning.” I experienced this firsthand last year when iSixSigma Magazine received editorial excellence honors. The awards provided an opportunity for us to pause and recognize the work that goes into our editorial efforts and to celebrate the accomplishments. But, as I said in my Editor’s Notes following the announcement, entering a competition is more than just a pat on the back. It also reinforces what you want to do tomorrow and the next day and the day after. 
Recognition and reinforcement are just a couple of the reasons to enter the iSixSigma Live! Awards. Here are a few more reasons:
1. Just being nominated is a boost for an individual or team2. Finalist and winners will be announced at an awards ceremony in South Beach, Fla., Feb. 3, in iSixSigma Magazine, and on iSixSigma.com.3. This year, the awards ceremony will be accompanied by music. Think YouTube sensation, wedding entrance dance. (OK, maybe not exactly like that, but there will be fun music.)4. The ceremony is held in conjunction with the iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards, Feb. 1-4. You won’t want to miss the great program lineup, networking opportunities, and sunshine of South Beach.
Award categories include:* iSixSigma's Six Sigma Hall of Fame * Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Projects (Categories: Transactional, Manufacturing, Supply Chain, Customer Service) * Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program 
Get more details on the awards categories and learn how to submit. The deadline for your chance to be “award-winning” is Nov. 30. 
But don’t wait until then. The first step of the submission process is a simple form, followed by submission of a storyboard or other support materials, depending on award category. So complete the first step now, and work on your materials over the coming weeks. Good luck!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:57:31 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Roping Process Improvement, DoD Style]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/roping_process_improvement_dod_style.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You may have seen the cover of the September/October issue of iSixSigma Magazine, featuring J.D. Sicilia and “The DoD Roundup.” The western theme continued into the DoD Breakthrough Convention, Oct. 14 to 16. 
Here’s a sneak peak of the fun: Jeannine Hall, director of events, taking a hand at roping a bull. Yes, this may look like a bale of hay with plastic horns, but use your imagination, as we did, and you’ll soon be envisioning City Slickers – in suits. Note: This is not a professional photograph, but some iPhone handiwork by Mike Cyger. 

Imagination was just one of the topics at the second annual event. More than 350 process improvement leaders from across the U.S. Department of Defense gathered in Lansdowne, Va., at the National Conference Center. One of my favorite facts about the DoD is that it is larger than the top five Fortune 500 companies combined. In an organization that large, building a continuous process improvement culture enterprise wide is, needless to say, no small feat. 
The Breakthrough Convention is one of the ways that the Defense Department is continuing to unite its Lean Six Sigma initiative under a common vision. Presenters hailed from several of the DoD services and agencies, as well as from other federal organizations, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs. 
You can get a glimpse of the photos of the presentations and networking receptions here. (And more roping photos here.)
And find out more about the DoD’s performance improvement efforts by reading “The DoD Roundup” on the iSixSigma Military Channel.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Military]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:27:58 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Top Ten Best Places to Work Announced]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/top_ten_best_places_to_work_announced.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The scoring is complete and the 2009 Top 10 Best Places to Work for Six Sigma professionals is out. 
Here is the Top 10 List in alphabetical order: I repeat, alphabetical order.


Cardinal Health Inc.
Computacenter AG &amp; Co. oHG
Ecolab Inc.
McKesson Corp.
Merck &amp; Co., Inc.
Pfizer Inc.
Piramal Healthcare Ltd.
Starwood Hotels, North America Operation
Vought Aircraft Industries Inc.
Xerox Corp.
The numbered order of this list will be revealed at an Awards ceremony and breakfast, February 3, 2010 during the iSixSigma Live! Summit and Awards in Miami. Congratulations to these companies as well as all those that participated.
There is still plenty of time to submit projects for consideration in other iSixSigma Live! Award categories:  

* Best Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized program* Largest Breakthrough Improvement Projects 
* Six Sigma Hall of Fame]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:53:41 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Trick or Treat]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/trick_or_treat.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:03:38 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Waiting for W.O.W.?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/waiting_for_wow.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today’s world seems to have us all going 90 miles an hour, multi-tasking and stretching ourselves to the limit to get things done.  Finding time for home, work, school, kids, parents, church, volunteering etc. has become one of our biggest challenges.  Time has become a precious commodity for everyone.  No one has it to waste and no one wants to wait.    So what does all this have to do with W.O.W.?  Everything.  
What’s Needed – On Time – With Value . . . Save time for your customers by enabling efficient transactions and watch your WOW-O-Meter go off scale.   How?  Reduce the time waiting in line, reduce the time holding on the phone, reduce the time a customer has to wait for a delivery, and enable transactions when your customer has time.   It’s all about the process.  Cut out bottlenecks and things will keep moving.  Eliminate defects and you won’t have to stop to fix them.  Remove unneeded steps or hand-offs and you’ll be one step closer to ‘lean time’.  Best of all, enable efficient transactions at a time that’s convenient to your customer and increase customer delight.
So, don’t keep your customers waiting for W.O.W.   Act now!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 03:48:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: TRIZ with Ellen Domb]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/triz_with_ellen_domb.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Next month (yes, I’m giving you early notice so you can put this in your calendar) TRIZ expert, Ellen Domb, will once again be on air with Steve Wilson of Quality Conversations, discussing practical applications of TRIZ.
Tuesday, Nov. 3rd, 11 AM Pacific. Be there. 
Ellen is also speaking at the iSixSigma Live Summit &amp; Awards in Miami next year. If you are looking for a reason to attend, Ellen’s TRIZ workshop would be reason enough - it’s fantastic. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:41:40 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Ultimate Organization?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_ultimate_organization.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

I’m going to go out on a limb and open up a discussion on the "Ultimate Organization" here.  In my last two posts, I talked a little bit about integrating the 6S culture in an organization (vs keeping it at a specialist level only) and organizational fear.  I figured a logical progression of the overall discussion would be to open up a thread to talk about what the ultimate organization would look like.  

Take a minute to reflect on your experiences (good and bad) on your involvement in 6S.  Then, if you can find the best scenario for success, fast forward a few years to the end game.  What does it look like (from president to the front line)?

There are a few motivations behind why I’m asking the question. The main one is that a lot of times we talk about what doesn’t work, or challenges that we face, but in the grand scheme, I have yet to see a discussion around what "utopia" looks like from a 6S standpoint.  Based on the varying experiences and industry affiliations of the readership here, I am really looking forward to the diverse possibilities of answers, as well as some great dialog.

Happy daydreaming!

-K

]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:05:19 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: With Thanks]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/with_thanks.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I had a very nice phone call today, from a colleague who had chatted with me earlier about a current project.  She called to say thanks for allowing her to bounce ideas around, which helped her clarify some things about her approach to the process.
Naturally I felt good to receive this feedback, and it made me think about my many associates who are in the process improvement community with me.  Sometimes it feels like skiing downhill, but sometimes it feels like I'm trying to go uphill without the ski lift.  It's during the tough times that I really rely on my fellow improvers to help me see a clear direction.
My colleague said that she had felt lost in the trees and confused about the path out of the forest.  I know I've felt like that sometimes too, and I told her that I'd probably be calling her soon so she could return the favor!
And, it reminded me to say a heartfelt "thanks" to the many people who have helped me to see more clearly when my own path seemed confused.
And also to say a sincere "thank you" to those of you who have read, and contributed to, this blog over the past three years.  It's hard to believe that this will be my 100th post, which milestone I would not have reached without your continuing support and responses!  I hope that you will keep on giving me your feedback - your conversations have been spirited, inspiring, generous, truthful, and above all educational!
With thanks for your time, your sharing of feedback with the iSixSigma blogosphere, and your efforts on behalf of your customers,
 Sue K.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:19:50 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Fourth Musketeer]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_fourth_musketeer.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA["One of all and all for one!"
Or, in the original French, "Tous pour un, un pour tous!"
In the story by Alexandre Dumas (1844), the three musketeers, Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, were joined by the musketeer-wannabee D'Artagnan, without whom the first three would have led very boring lives.
I was reminded of this the other day, when discussing the elements of a successful process improvement deployment.  You will recognize the top three that were mentioned: focus on the customer; front-line engagement; structured methodology.  I'm going to submit to you that the concept of the Three Musketeers can serve as a metaphor for those three.  And, then, add the fourth (which you have already thought of anyway), which is committed leadership - without which, you will not be having many grand adventures in improvement.
So in your improvement experience, how many times have you gone into a project doing an assessment for these four issues - whether the organization knows how to focus on the customer effectively, or not?  Whether they treat their front-line workers as knowledge resources and Subject Matter Experts, or not?  Whether they have, or are willing to adopt, a structured methodology and all that is implied?  And, perhaps most importantly, whether the leadership is truly engaged and committed to process improvement as a way of life - or whether they just think it's the next best thing to try?  And, are these four elements integrated so that they can proclaim "One for all, and all for one?"
Please share your thoughts on this.  How many Musketeers do you have, where you work???]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:07:19 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Research: Misused Lean Six Sigma Tools]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/research_misused_lean_six_sigma_tools.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The latest iSixSigma Magazine research is about to be released in the upcoming November/December issue. 
For this research we surveyed over 800 Six Sigma practitioners and asked them all about the tools they use, the tools they don’t use, and what tools they think are misused…
The chart at the left is the top 10 tools that practitioners said are commonly misused. (Click for larger view.)  FMEA clearly stands out, but the remaining 9 tools each bring in a fairly steady 4-5 percent of the vote. 
For the full results, including the top 10 “most used,” top 10 “least used,” and the top 10 “never heard of that tool,” see the November/December issue of iSixSigma Magazine.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:08:51 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Data Transformation]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/data_transformation.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:41:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: It's a &quot;Circle of Life&quot; Thing!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/its_a_circle_of_life_thing.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I used to be really annoyed with people who took a wait-and-see approach to change.  They're not resistant, exactly, and they might be classified as "late adopters."  But I could understand active resistance better than passive indifference.
Now, however, I have a little different take on things.  Because I have realized that if you wait long enough, you may find that whatever was changed comes back around again!
Such as... 

Centralization vs decentralization of departments or functions
Use of consultants vs hiring internal resources
Outsourcing vs insourcing
This reminded me about the lines from the Disney movie, "The Lion King," where young Simba gets the explanation about how the antelopes eat the grass and the lions eat the antelopes, and then the lions die and their bodies turn to grass (OK, you knew it would be a PG version) which is then eaten by the antelopes.  So everything comes back to a big circle of replaying the same scenarios.
For process changes, it's easy to see how this becomes just another bright idea to wait out, to someone who's been around a long time.  Especially when you're in an organization that promises that every change is NOT just the flavor of the month, and then six months later it's disappeared.  So how can I criticize someone for saying, "Well, go ahead with this Lean thing, I'll just wait and see what comes of it before getting enthusiastic about it."  After all, they've probably been right about all the other wonderful new initiatives and changes that have come and gone before.
Maybe you are fortunate enough to work in a place which has solved this circular pattern, or maybe you are trying to break out of that.  Would you care to share your experiences, to help us put some perspective on the issue?
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 08:51:52 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Customer W.O.W.  - The Time is Now!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/customer_wow_the_time_is_now.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What’s Needed - On Time - With Value  (W.O.W.)  It’s even more relevant in today’s economy.  As families struggle to make ends meet, the value provided for the dollar spent is more important than ever.  What does this mean?  Higher expectations from customers at a time when businesses themselves are tightening up the spending reins.  What should we do?   Panic?  No - we don’t need to stinkin’ panic  . . . we got Six Sigma!
For decades, the "excellence minded" have used Six Sigma to balance the Quality - Delivery - Cost equation.   And it’s times like these that will separate the "excellence minded" from the "naysayers".   For excellence is not a linear function of money rather it is a combination of passion, planning, process and people.   It’s not about squeezing the last dollar out of your process; it’s about finding new and innovative ways to deliver value at a lower cost.  So what are you waiting for?  Get out your six sigma toolbox, get engaged and take the lead in creating customer W.O.W.   It’s time!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 03:56:51 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Seventh Annual iSixSigma Global Salary Survey]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/seventh_annual_isixsigma_global_salary_survey.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Now accepting salaries! Each year iSixSigma analyzes the data from its own iSixSigma Job Shop to create a comprehensive Six Sigma Salary report available in the March/April issue of iSixSigma Magazine.
Last year data showed that the average Black Belt in the United States made an average salary of $88,438. Master Black Belts brought home an average of nearly 120K. I don’t know about you, but I am very interested to see what those numbers look like this year. 
I invite you to participate this year by logging into your Job Shop Account and updating your resume. If you do not have a Job Shop account, create one for free. We will be collecting data until next week: October 15, 2009. Thanks!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:04:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Culture Change and Fear]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/culture_change_and_fear.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

There’s no doubt that fear can prevent an organization to be what it could be, but what can be done about it...how many times have you been in a situation where there were problems to solve, but no one stepped up to the plate to solve them because of fear? Piggy-backing on my previous posting, this could be another inhibitor to making 6S truly mainstream.  Take for example the following:
A defect is identified, and there is no clear root cause.  Short term fixes are employed.  A person is nominated to handle the problem solving, and as analysis is performed, the exercise becomes one of self-protection.  Groups that are involved begin to work on proving that they are NOT the root cause.  The activity becomes so muddy that no clear root cause is ever found.  Whatever band-aid that was put in place becomes the solution, and the cycle starts again...
What is the bottom line here?  To me - fear.  Fear of being the guy or gal that stands up to say their department owns the root cause...just like fear shuts down dialog, fear can also shut down team problem solving.

So the question is, how do we foster change so that we overcome fear?  How do we create a safe environment for problem solving effectively with free expression?   

]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:27:50 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma TRIZ]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_triz.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Tomorrow (Wednesday, Sept 30), Ellen Domb, founder of the TRIZ Journal, will be on Steve Wilson’s show Quality Conversations, hosted by blogtalkradio. 
Steve has interviewed a plethora of quality professionals in the past. Guest appearances include Tom Kubiak, Forrest Breyfogle, Mark Graban, Jessica Harper, as well as yours truly. 
Ellen and Steve will be talking about Six Sigma Trees. Not the kind that grow in your backyard, but rather the kind that Ellen so expertly sows into everyday business improvement thought processes...TRIZ sure has a way of growing on you. I’ve attended Ellen’s TRIZ workshops several times and always enjoy her style, method, and expertise in teaching the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving.  
Below is the promo introducing the show. Check it out tomorrow 8:30 Central. 

"Standard quality improvement methodologies such as DMAIC and PDSA have always incorporated brainstorming as a key method for finding creative solutions to problems. Brainstorming is designed to liberate a team’s thinking from past patterns and and uncover ideas that people might have unconsciously suppressed. When it works its great. But what happens when it does not work...if the solution lies outside the experience of the team? Ellen Domb, long time expert on the subject of TRIZ and founder of the TRIZ Journal joins us today to talk about the need for the use of TRIZ in Six Sigma."]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:47:45 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Bimodal Distribution]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/bimodal_distribution.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 15:12:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Business Scenarios]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/business_scenarios.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[How do you describe a process to a team? There are lots of tools in the toolkit including value stream mapping, functional swim lanes, context diagrams and SIPOC to name a few. But I find they can be “a little cold” for a non-technical or cross-functional team and I want to “bring it to life”.
Take a simple example from the area I work in, general insurance. To describe the customer claims process in any depth takes time. So when you have a cross-functional team covering front, middle and back office it can mean (even with the tightest time keeping and agenda) that the people at the end of the process don’t get a look in as most of the day has been spent at the beginning/middle of the process, where all the customer interaction happens. So you end-up leaving people out. 
As the title suggests my recommendation is Business Scenarios. Rather than cover the generic customer claims process, cover it in a series of business scenarios like

The policy holder’s vehicle collided with a lamppost, no one else was involved, it happened at 11:45pm
The policy holder’s vehicle was hit by a 3rd party vehicle from behind, both vehicles were drivable, no one appears injured at the scene, 3rd party was insured and traceable
The policy holder’s vehicle collided was a 3rd party vehicle on a narrow street, liability is unclear, 3rd party injured and vehicle undriveable
If you start with the simplest scenario where nothing goes wrong (sunny-day) then you can rapidly walk the whole process.  You can add complexity as you need to. Maybe include failures in the process and known exceptions (rainy-day) e.g. 3rd party had no insurance. 
This approach really opens up the discussion as you are talking to people in the language they relate to. You get to see the true degree of variation required of the process which allows for more robust solutions.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 08:41:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Is There A Place For Six Sigma As We Know It In The Future]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/is_there_a_place_for_six_sigma_as_we_know_it_in_the_future.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have been thinking about various topics regarding Six Sigma recently, and I keep coming back to a question that is hard to answer...if we "do Six Sigma" right, is there even a place for Six Sigma as we know it ten or twenty years down the road?Consider this.....ten years from now, do you really want to have Black Belts doing project work? Or...do you want Six Sigma tools to be the status quo of how the business is operated by everyone? To me the latter is the end game, but does the "classical" approach to Six Sigma (Black Belts doing projects) fit the end game??...I’m not so sure.How do we structure Six Sigma in general to better fit the end game of real culture change, instead of creating a bunch of "super problem solvers"?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 20:27:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Alice in Processland]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/alice_in_processland.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A quote from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson), 1865:
"The White Rabbit put on his spectacles.  'Where shall I begin, please your Majesty?' he asked.  'Begin at the beginning,' the King said gravely, 'and go on till you come to the end: then stop.'"
I am sure I'm not the only one who as asked, "Where does this process begin?" only to find a dozen or so different answers, depending on who is asked.  Just how far back doyou go into the decision-making that may trigger a process, and the factors that influence the decision, and the issues that led to the factors being important, etc. etc. etc.?
And, where does the process stop?  For a product, is it when the customer receives the goods?  When they use the item for the first time?  When they finish using the item?  Or, for a service, when they receive the service, or when they utilize the benefits of the service if that's at a later time?
This may seem simple, but, in practice I've seen a lot of conversations get into a circular mode about just what step should be considered the start or trigger for the process.  I'm just wondering if anyone has any words of wisdom, from their experience with process mapping and process analysis - and would you like to share?
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:31:54 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean vs Six Sigma]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_vs_six_sigma.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P/ Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Quality Conversation with Steve Wilson]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/quality_conversation_with_steve_wilson.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

 
The archive of my Quality Conversation with Steve Wilson this morning. Thanks Steve for having me on your show.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 10:08:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Quality Conversations]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/quality_conversations.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Monday, Sept 14, I'll be speaking with Steve Wilson on his show Quality Conversations, hosted by blogtalkradio. Steve has interviewed many quality professionals in the past, including Tom Kubiak, Forrest Breyfogle, Mark Graban and our very own iSixSigma editor-in-chief, Jessica Harper. I am happy to join the ranks of Steve's guest list. 
We're going to be talking Six Sigma and the Economy... discussing the findings of a recent iSixSigma Magazine research report published in July this year. We'll be talking about serious subjects such as budget cuts, workloads, and job losses as well as more positive aspects the down economy is bringing out in companies practicing Six Sigma.
The conversation is live and open to callers, so if you want to call in and heckle me...go ahead, make my day.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Podcasts]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 07:40:09 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Religion Behind Mandated Leadership]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_religion_behind_mandated_leadership.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If there’s one thing I’ve noticed about the effect the current economy is having on businesses, it’s the polarization of Six Sigma. Programs have either been seen as the reverent coming of the messiah or the two-bit television evangelist that needs to be turned off and forgotten about. For those companies that feel they are struggling for airtime, discussions about revitalization and redeployment have been preached by change agents to the senior leadership team. One of the common beliefs in these sermons focuses on the mandate to promote only those with Six Sigma belt certifications into future leadership roles. The belief is if the converted are the ones in charge, the religion of Six Sigma will continue to be institutionalized within the fold. 
As a knight who chivalrously crusades to protect the reputation of Six Sigma, I have to tell you this belief is not a pragmatic approach to keep face time in the pulpit. First of all, the person in charge to drive the mandate is usually not someone in a Human Resources or Continuous Improvement role, but rather an executive leader, such as the CEO and as a result, the mandate becomes a function of the person (and not the program). I can think of several companies in the past that required future leaders to be at least Green Belt trained only to abandon the requirement when a new executive regime was put in place. What kind of message does this say about your Six Sigma program when two managers had to take different pathways to get to the same role? 
Rather, companies who want to maintain a strong process improvement mindset need to take a two pronged approach. First, there should be a requirement for leaders to have Six Sigma executive awareness training. The training could be similar to a Yellow Belt package but should also involve concepts such as Lean, Practical Problem Solving, ISO, etc. Keep in mind this mandate is different than requiring leaders to be a Green or Black Belt. Senior leadership needs to have understanding, appreciation and respect for the Six Sigma program. They also need in-depth coaching on their role as champions which is generally not taught in Green/Black Belt courses. 
The second part of the approach to revitalization is an assessment to ensure the employee is competent before moving into a leader role. Things to ask to determine a supportive future leader (as you would in a Six Sigma project) are:

Can the employee clearly describe problems, lead a scope of work to resolve them, and achieve results? 
Can the employee work as part of a team? 
Can the employee make sound decisions based of the effective analysis of fact based data? 
Is the work done by the employee sustainable and embedded within the company?
Being a in a Green or Black Belt role can answer these questions, however the mandate to require this designation is not a poke yoke substitution to a solid leadership competency assessment. If these competencies are truly the way a person works everyday, you know they are legitimate future leaders who will be receptive to a data driven problem solving approach (and not someone who is getting a certificate for a one off project they begrudgingly complete).  Also, companies may have other roles such as Lean Coaches, Project Managers who use the PrinceII methodology, etc. 
By creating a Six Sigma mandate to move ahead, resentment occurs invoking competition and before you know it, the organization has a quality jihad on its hands. 
Having a Six Sigma certification is a nice to have, however it does not guarantee you are a true believer nor does it guarantee to the organization someone with the insight of divine right has ascended to the leadership throne and will continue to preach a Six Sigma message. Revitalization can occur if the message is one of respect for complimenting initiatives. Belt mandates for leaders only lead to purgatory with future leaders tying pages of their Six Sigma manuals and certificates into ropes to climb into management heaven.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Holly Hawkins]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:14:13 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Open Season For Awards]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/open_season_for_awards.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[iSixSigma is pleased to announce the opening of award nominations for the iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards in Miami in February 2010. Here’s what we are looking for:

* iSixSigma’s Six Sigma Hall of Fame: iSixSigma will recognize individuals who have significantly impacted corporate growth and shareholder value through the use of Lean Six Sigma by inducting them into the Six Sigma Hall of Fame. Last year Bill Smith was the first inductee into the Six Sigma Hall of Fame.
* Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Projects: In keeping with the conference theme of "Practices That Make Profits," iSixSigma will recognize Lean Six Sigma projects with the largest "breakthrough" results in four categories – supply chain, transactional, manufacturing and customer service.
* Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program: This award recognizes the most successful start-up or the most invigorating re-energized deployment. 
* iSixSigma MVP Awards: iSixSigma’s MVP awards recognize individuals that have made outstanding voluntary contributions to the Six Sigma community through the iSixSigma Discussion Forum, Blogosphere and Twitter. (Finalists and winners for the MVP awards will be determined by iSixSigma’s editorial team.)
The deadline for submitting projects and nominations is Nov. 30. For more information on award categories and entry requirements, visit: http://live.isixsigma.com/awards/default.html]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 15:35:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Boss Goes to the Doctor]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_boss_goes_to_the_doctor.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 08:55:02 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Best Place to Work]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/the_best_place_to_work.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Nominations are open for iSixSigma’s second annual Best Places to Work List. If you are working for a top notch company using Lean Six Sigma, go ahead and nominate it to be included in our list of Best Places to Work.
Last year 10 companies made the list. McKesson took home the #1 spot, followed by Vought Aircraft Industries and Textron. 
Read all about what makes McKesson the Best Place to Work in the latest article on iSixSigma.com. (This article was previously published only in iSixSigma Magazine).
If your company treats its Six Sigma employees right, let us know by nominating it for this year’s list. 
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=o3tIVeS1bYHbYiosX5BGNg_3d_3d
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:24:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Will the Real Process Owner Please Stand Up?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/will_the_real_process_owner_please_stand_up.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When I was leading a department, I never thought of myself as a process owner.  It wasn't in my job description, and I never heard anyone used the term.  It's one of those useful concepts that I wish I had known, prior to my Six Sigma and Lean education.
Here's my working definition:  The process owner is that leader who is closest to the process itself, who has responsibility for achieving the expected outcome of the process, both before and after an improvement project.
So now, I try to introduce the term right away and use it frequently so that everyone knows what the role is, in respect to a project (and afterwards).  I also try to spend extra time with the process owner if they are new to the role.  Even then, though, it's hard sometimes to get across the continuing expectations.  A statement that I hear frequently is, "I'm glad that the project is over - now I can quit being the process owner!"
Have any of you faced this challenge, or is it more clearcut in some industries than in others?  Have you had to do extra education or mentoring of someone who was not sure they were a process owner - for either a project or a process?  Do you have a different definition of process owner, that's been helpful for you?
It would be great to hear your thoughts.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:38:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: MSA on the Forum]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/msa_on_the_forum.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 16:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Last Chance! Call for Speakers: iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards 2010]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/last_chance_call_for_speakers_isixsigma_live_summit_amp_awards_2010.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The deadline to submit a speaking proposal for the second annual iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards has been extended one week. If you were on the fence about submitting an idea, now’s the time to take action. 
More than 200 of the world’s top business leaders and operational experts will gather, Feb. 1-4, 2010, in Miami, Fla., USA at The Ritz-Carlton, South Beach. The theme is "Practices That Make Profits.” Don’t miss this chance to share your related inspirational stories, concrete examples and actionable strategies.
Extended deadline for proposals: Friday, Aug. 7, 2009. Visit http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=IUanv83qkQ3wpNlWCZF_2faQ_3d_3d to learn more.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:33:13 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: My Favorite Tools]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/my_favorite_tools.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, maybe I have more than one favorite tool - but there are 2 that are fun to use with a group.
One is sticky-note brainstorming.  It avoids the perils of the regular "everybody call out their ideas" brainstorming, because (a) you get 100% participation; (b) you can get LOTS of ideas in just a few minutes; (c) you don’t need a scribe to try to capture everything as multiple people are speaking quickly; (d) you avoid people being worried about "what will my boss think" about an idea; (e) it’s anonymous so people are braver; (f) you can put duplicates on top of one another and categorize with ease, just by moving them around.  Also (g) you can use colorful sticky-notes and make a cheerful impression rather than a boring one!
Secondly, if I’m using the group’s ideas to capture possible solutions, I really like to use an Impact/Effort Matrix.  You may have heard of this under another name - it’s a 2x2 matrix with Impact along one axis (High, Low) and Effort along the other (Easy, Hard).  I ask the group members to place the sticky notes in the appropriate category - if there’s doubt they can place them on the dividing line.  Then I can facilitate the group to ask, "Does this idea belong here?  Do we all agree that it’s High Impact (or whatever) and Easy to do?"  If not, we have a good discussion and end up with consensus.  It’s amazing how this helps to prioritize the efforts - we will definitely pursue the "High Impact, Easy" ideas; think about a plan for the "High Impact, Hard" ideas; see if we can catch some low hanging fruit with the "Low Impact, Easy" ideas; and forget about the "Low Impact, Hard" ideas.
These ideas can then be turned into action plans or placed in a parking lot as appropriate.  Using the sticky-note brainstorming to get 100% participation, and the Impact/Effort Matrix to prioritize ideas, results in better decision-making and better buy-in to the resulting plans.
What are your favorite change management / process improvement tools?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:33:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Great Healthcare Debate]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_great_healthcare_debate.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[While the iSixSigma.com site has been down, the rhetoric about "fixing healthcare" in the US has dramatically heated up.  "We need to take the waste out of healthcare!"  "We're paying too much for healthcare!"  "Everyone should get all the healthcare they need regardless of cost!"
Without getting into the political debate, let's just touch on these points from a quality perspective.
There's a balance between cost, speed and quality that's quite a challenge in healthcare.  For example, if I order $5000 worth of tests on day 1, and can tell you your diagnosis on day 2 and start treatment, what's that worth to you and your health (even if it turns out that 5 tests out of the 30 ordered didn't help with the diagnosis)?  How about taking the cost-effective route:  I'll order one test per day, evaluate the results, and then order the next test.  It may take me 21 days to figure it out, while you are waiting all the while, but hey! it did cost less!  So, in which example was there more waste???
Paying too much for healthcare... does that mean we are paying more than the value we receive, or just more than we desire to (or can afford to) pay?  Most of us a) don't know how much our healthcare actually costs; b) can't judge the quality of the medical care we receive; and c) won't haggle over the cost of an IV solution when the care of a loved one is at stake.  There's an emotional element of this debate that is not susceptible to logical reasoning.  We see this in all the stories of people who have gotten poor care or ran out of money or their insurance wouldn't cover a certain procedure.  If we try to "ration" care in the most logical way possible, we immediately run into the emotional (or moral, if you prefer) discussion about denying care to those who need it on a purely financial basis.  The factual and emotional issues are entangled as we debate this topic.  
Should everyone get the healthcare they need regardless of cost?  It's my personal opinion that provision of basic services, including healthcare, should be a function of an organized society.  But, it's not a "commodity" service like garbage collection, is it?  Since we do have to look to our tax-paying citizens and employers to pay for "healthcare for all" - the question of course is, how much should each of us contribute to this worthy cause?  And who decides how that money is to be used?
Having stirred the pot this morning, I will close by saying - it's a complex system!

There are no "specifications" for inputs (patients who need care come in all conditions and with variation in their genetic, mental, physical, experiential, cultural, economic, and social backgrounds); 
Processes are highly complex with many stakeholders and overlapping responsibilities
There is an expert-based culture of physician caregivers (now expanding slightly to other medical professionals);
Outcomes may not meet the patients' goals through no-one's fault (you can mostly blame our biologically-based life processes, I guess) but which may in some cases be due to poor care or non-compliance on the part of the patient (for example, not taking medications in the way they were prescribed).  
So I just caution you to think carefully about all the proposals that will be floated to "fix" the healthcare system, and don't jump to solutions too soon on this one.
Is healthcare in its current form in the US perfect?  NO!  But first I think we have to go back to quality basics and agree on who are the customers, and what is value-added to those customers.  I've seen many more "solutions" floated, than thoughtful consideration of just what it is we want to get to.  I encourage everyone to join this debate from the quality improvement perspective, and to lend your expertise to the discussion!
 
p.s.  It's good to be "back on the air" again!  Kudos to those at iSixSigma.com who have been working to resolve the issues that interrupted service over the past several weeks.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 05:36:37 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Why is Quality Planning So Much of an Afterthought?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/why_is_quality_planning_so_much_of_an_afterthought.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[


It’s really interesting for me to look back and think about how many times quality planning has come up as an afterthought.  It is staggering for me to think about what could have happened if quality planning was done the proper way.


Here’s an example....one time I was involved with a new product introduction, and one of the major milestones in the quality planning protocol was for gage repeatability to be assessed and acceptable by a certain date.  Sounds fine and dandy right?  Well, the exercise turned into a frustrating one, as discussions turned into something like "did the gage r&amp;r’s get done today?", without even considering why they were being done in the first place.  Moreover, people who didn’t know the first thing about what a grr was were asking the questions.....


I’ve seen this phenomenon across several industries, and it makes me wonder if up-front quality planning generally is really taken seriously at all.....

]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 26 Jul 2009 20:06:26 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Back Online Again]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/back_online_again.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[iSixSigma.com is back online!
It has taken more than a month to set straight what clever and malicious hackers did. Our e-media team, along with a high-profile security consultant and a band of programmers, diligently worked to resolve the multitude of problems injected into our websites. All the time and effort moving the sites to new servers, repairing and cleaning thousands of lines of code and fully testing the sites has paid off. Our websites are now safe and reliable.
During the time the website was down, we talked to a lot of site users. Some were disappointed, some were sympathetic, but nearly everyone asked the question: Can you tell us more about what happened and explain what is taking you so long to get back online?
What was the root cause of the problem? Our firewall protection was not as good as we had understood it to be. That’s why we have moved our websites to new servers. Those servers are behind multiple firewalls and are monitored in a much more aggressive way than our old one. Moving a complex of interconnected websites that were designed and built during an eight-year period, often using hard coding, unfortunately takes more than a few days.
What did we find during our analysis of the hack? While every hack is seen as bad by those who are hacked, it seems our attacker was especially nasty. Our experienced security consultants indicated that this was one of the worst attacks they have seen. Fortunately the hacker had no access to e-commerce transactions, which are handled by third party specialists. Also, while it is possible that the hacker collected email addresses, evidence suggests that the primary motivation was to install malware on end-users' personal computers. This code had to be painstakingly discovered and removed.
What consideration did we provide customers? Our initial decision was to keep the sites up during the first days as our technical people began the battle with the hackers. When it became apparent that the problems were greater than originally assumed, we shut down the sites before our problems could spread to those who visited us. We decided to work with deliberation to make sure the repairs to the site were complete and that sufficient safeguards were installed to prevent this kind of hack from happening again.
I apologize for the inconveniences this has caused those who use our sites. While no one can guarantee an online site free of outside influences, we can and do commit ourselves to being among the best sites on the web. Following that course, we will continue to make more improvements in functionality as we move ahead with an iSixSigma site redesign project begun in May. Our objective remains to provide the best Lean Six Sigma information possible. Obviously we want everyone who visited our sites during the last eight-plus years to feel that we are not only back, but better than ever.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Frank Ducceschi]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 14:17:59 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: State of Maine – CI-P's Visit Lonza.]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/state_of_maine__ci_ps_visit_lonza.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Monday June 1, 2009 Continuous Improvement Practitioners (CI-P), from the State of Maine "Bend the Curve” initiative, led by Walter Lowell, conducted a study mission at Lonza in Rockland Maine. To quote from the Lonza web site, “Lonza is one of the world’s leading suppliers to the pharmaceutical, healthcare and life science industries. Its products and services span its customers’ needs from research to final product manufacture.”
Lonza recently began some Six Sigma initiatives including Value Stream mapping and specific Kaizen and Kanban analysis that have reduced waste, lowered required inventory, automated some processes, increased productivity and saved money in most every area reviewed. Jon Kirsh, formerly with MEP Maine has new VSM planned for a number of other areas and is hoping for the same results. 
The most impressive changes according to Jon included a 5S review of the research and develop workshop and the incorporation of KANBAN signs in various production areas to alert staff of lowed inventory or need for other resource ordering. Six Sigma tools have made a significant difference in the work that LONZA does. I enjoyed seeing the practical and economical process changes these tools have effected at LONZA.
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:23:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Parachute in the Fire Fighter]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/parachute_in_the_fire_fighter.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Organisation in chaos? Emergencies erupting? Been blind-sided by the unexpected? Project a few years late and still does not work? Need to get things under control? Make way for the Corporate Fire Fighter. (Phew!)
This trusted pair of hands hits the ground running….makes rapid assessment of situation….. takes urgent action …... reports an outstanding success …….moves onto the next big fire. 
You could be thinking, “Hey that’s me!”. Agreed fire-fighting can be fun, exhilarating and very rewarding for those involved. Your organisation may place a high degree of recognition and reward on people with these skills.
But is this a measure of a healthy and successful organisation? 
Would an alternative model be of a highly organised machine where everything fits strategically together; risks are identified and addressed early; projects invariably deliver on time, cost &amp; quality; business metrics provide robust leading indicators. Achieving that level of capability is difficult, very difficult.
An organisation may not have this level maturity for any number of reasons. They may be a business start-up and just about managing to keep a lid on issues as the business grows. They may be working in a highly innovative sector where new products and competitors frequently appear to “eat your lunch”.
But what about the fire starters? The leaders who raise the alarm? Is this the right thing to do?
I am no expert on management leadership &amp; behaviour theory. It might be just the right thing to do to keep people on their toes? Creating a crisis can be a good way to drive things forward. Or is it a reactive and costly approach?
Ultimately I think it comes down to looking at the root-cause and fixing what/who caused the crisis in the first place rather than heroic fire-fighting.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 05:27:45 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Fishing for Defects]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/fishing_for_defects.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jun 2009 22:29:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Conference Survey]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_conference_survey.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ 
iSixSigma Live! wants to know what you want out of an in-person event. We invite you to participate in a short survey about business process improvement conferences. 
How many conferences do you attend a year? What do you expect out of a conference? Where would you like to see the next iSixSigma Live! event? These are just a few of the questions we ask in a short 16-question survey.
Click on the link below to begin.http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=fLUzbxjj15mnZkS_2fRmK26g_3d_3d
Thanks for your time.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:57:32 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Training:  Enough, Already?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/training_enough_already.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I enjoy teaching, so if you asked me whether you could do too much training, my first response would be "no, of course not!"
But, on second thought, I would have to say, "well, maybe."
It's been my experience that knowledge alone is usually not enough to create an improvement.  A lot of people enjoy being trained (a day away from the office, with lunch included) and also like knowing what could be done to create a better process.  But, having a lot of knowledgeable people bumping around in your organization doesn't necessarily mean that there are any improvement activities going in.  It's the doing - or execution, if you will - that separates the thinkers from the achievers.  So the important question seems to be, when do you know enough to start improving things?
There is a train of thought that runs like this:  "We don't need to train our whole organization in Lean or Six Sigma; that takes way to long to get any ROI (Return on Investment).  Let's start by getting some project teams together and use them to drive improvements."
There's another train of thought that says, "Let's not go shooting off in a lot of different directions. We'll train our executives, then our other leaders, then our managers, then our front-line staff; we'll come up with a deployment plan, and then we'll be ready to do projects."
So is there a "right" way to approach a Lean Six Sigma deployment?
Now, before you all write back to me telling saying that the answer is "IT DEPENDS!" I will ask the question a different way:  Have you, in your experiences, ever found that an organization did too much training?  Or that an organization did too little training?  What were the effects or consequences?  And what advice would you give an organization new to Lean Six Sigma, on the balance between training and project focus?  Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughts!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 11:10:15 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Y is a Function of X]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/y_is_a_function_of_x.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 07:53:43 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Mapping a Path to the  W.O.W. Side]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/mapping_a_path_to_the_wow_side.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Consistently delighting customers and providing exceptional handling of issues and errors using the R.A.P.I.D. methodology are two ways to create customer W.O.W.  (What’s Needed - On Time - With Value)  But just figuring out how it’s done is of little value if you cannot consistently deliver.    Process maps, which are an integral part of the Six Sigma methodology, enable this consistency.  
Process maps identify inputs and outputs of the process.  Targeting specific inputs where best practices can be applied will help assure actions that create customer W.O.W. (delighters) are integrated into the process.   Customer feedback on past performance as well as trends related to customer issues can also be linked back to specific steps in the process map where the process can be modified to prevent problems or add delighters. 
Once finalized, a process map serves as a learning tool to help train all stakeholders on the consistent approach that has been developed.   The process map provides a broad view of how specific actions, consistently applied, help create the type of overall experience needed to achieve Customer W.O.W.   And, if needed, the map can also serve as a basis for creating a Standard Operating Procedure or Job Aid that provides steps that will facilitate this consistent approach. 
Finding your way to the W.O.W. Side is not an easy task.  But once there, helping others consistently find the way is much easier if you build them a map.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 08:05:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: What is truth?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/what_is_truth.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Over the last 5 years I have invested considerable time &amp; energy in trying to become a skilled continuous improvement practitioner. I am a strong believer in continual learning via direct deployment experience.
Over this same period, continuous improvement has become a main-stream product. Any business without an Operational Excellence, Process Improvement, Process Excellence, Continual Improvement (and so on) capability is now way behind the curve. This dramatic growth has brought a large increase in the number of CI professionals.
Here is the point; these days I have conversations with other CI professionals that make me wonder I have learnt the right things, things like:

The scientific way of experimenting is to change one factor at a time 
The most important factor in sampling is population size 
Reducing overall process time has nothing to do with becoming Lean
Where did I go wrong? Case in point is the ex-GE Master Black Belt. Now I don’t like to generalise and easily the best MBB I have ever met was from GE, but my other experiences have not been so good. Ever had to explain proportion tests and what a chi-square test does to a ex-GE MBB?
How to conclude? Maybe we could agree a single version of the truth and certify against this? Maybe it’s just part of the evolution of CI? I just don’t know. But I feel the CI world changing.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2009 10:03:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Project Reporting]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/project_reporting.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 08:28:02 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Getting the Word Out]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/getting_the_word_out.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When I begin a new project, I include a Communication Plan as part of my team work.  That is, we take the stakeholder list and think about who we need to be in communication with, as we move through the project phases.  Some of you may do this based on an ARMI exercise (Approvers/ Resources/ Members/ Interested Parties) or Stakeholder Analysis exercise (List of key stakeholders and their estimated level of commitment to the project).  We include activities like face-to-face conversations, presentations in department meetings, newsletter articles, postings on the web site, etc.
But even though we try to heed the mantra, "communicate 8 times, 8 ways" it seems like we always have a gap in our communication.
For example:  Our team invites a key department leader to our project meeting; we discuss our project and get agreement as to next steps.  We plan an elevator speech and ask the leader to discuss it at his/her next department meeting and get agreement to do that.  We talk about possibly sending an email or posting information on the department's bulletin board for those who can't attend the meeting.  All good so far!
Then, a week later - after the department meeting, and having seen for ourselves that the information is posted on the bulletin board, a few team members stroll through the department to gauge the level of buy-in.  And - do they find that everyone is informed, interested, and enthusiastic about the project?  Or, do they find that people are negative toward the new process that's coming their way?
Why, no!  We find that most people remember vaguely hearing something about some new process, and others just give us blank stares.  When the bulletin board is mentioned, we get the response "Oh, I know it's there but it never changes so I don't look at it."
So, what are our learnings from this type of situation?  We only communicated once or twice, one or two ways - so obviously we would need to keep our communication plan active!  But are there other ways that you have been successful communicating outside of your project team, as you make progress?  Thanks in advance for sharing!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 08:24:06 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Practical Use of Control Plans]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/practical_use_of_control_plans.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Now more than ever, the development and use of control plans play a critical role in succesfully implementing a new process. In my past, I have seen varying ways that control plans have been implemented, but I still struggle a little when I try to find a really good example of control plan development.

To me, control plans need to be developed upfront in the development process. This is really important so that key product attributes (ctq’s) are constantly aligned with process control parameters. Some may think that developing control plans this early is a waste of time (since processes typically don’t get defined so early), but why not let the process itself be defined by the control plan?

So how do your organizations use control plans... I’d love to know...
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 11:04:47 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Ready for Change... Almost!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/ready_for_change_almost.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You've completed your planning phase - whether it's specifying value and mapping the value stream, Defining / Measuring / Analyzing, or Planning - and you're ready to move into Creating Flow, Improving, or Doing.  Hooray!  The pilot plan has been finalized, the Process Owner says it's fine, the team is ready to move forward.  And then...
Little cracks start appearing in the plan.  "We forgot about..."  "One of our team members says the plan won't work because..."  "We thought the computer system did THIS and instead it works like THAT so our plan needs to be changed!"
How many times have you gone through these pre-improvement jitters?  Is it a matter of staying calm in the face of chaos, staying the course, trusting the process?  Have you ever had an experience where you really did have to call a halt and regroup, because you found out that there was a major roadblock in your path?
As an optimist, I try to stay flexible and reassure the team that we can address issues as they appear, usually by obtaining additional information and clarifying the issue before deciding that we need to make a change.  But I have had to halt a project just as we were moving into Improve, because the hospital decided to implement a new computer system in the department just at that time, rather than waiting for the project to be completed.  And in fact, if we had completed our project without the new system, we probably would have had to re-do the process following the system implementation anyway.  Plus, the same people who were on our team were also the people who were wanted for the design of the new system, so there was a resource conflict as well.
What we did was to put the project on "hiatus" for three months.  Then, we re-measured and re-analyzed, to see if we still had the same critical factors, tweaked our Improve plan, and proceeded.  It didn't feel very good at the time, but it all worked out in the end.
Have you had this experience?  How did you handle a halt or delay in a project that was in full swing?  Please share your stories!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 07:28:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Swansong]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/swansong.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Time are topsy-turvy, and change is in the air. My role has evolved away from Six Sigma over the past several months, and my readers – both of you – may have noticed I’ve been posting here less and less. This will be my last post. Thanks for all the comments and emails. It’s been fun and I’ve very much appreciated the pulpit and bullhorn that iSixSigma has provided.
I’ll enjoy being a reader for the rest of the excellent bloggers on this site in the future. Keep up the good work.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Saves Paccar a Truckload of Money]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_saves_paccar_a_truckload_of_money.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I first wrote about Paccar and Six Sigma back in 2005, then again in 2006 I wrote a blurb with some noteworthy news. Today Paccar released their Q1 earning report that highlights the most current status of their Six Sigma and Lean deployments.   

Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing Generate Savings and Improve Efficiency“PACCAR’s application of Six Sigma tools together with Lean Manufacturing techniques have generated cumulative benefits for PACCAR of $1.2 billion since 1998,” commented Helene Mawyer, PACCAR vice president. “Thirteen thousand PACCAR employees have been trained in Six Sigma and over 10,000 projects have been implemented throughout the company. Six Sigma and Lean projects are integrated in all PACCAR facilities and have improved product quality and reduced costs in the factories and offices.”
Wow have they done well with Six Sigma and Lean. More than 10 years after the initial implementation, Helene Mawyer (who has been there since the early days) is now a VP and still touting the efficiency gains at Paccar. In 2004 they had trained 7000+ employees. Now it’s up to 13,000. Over the course of their deployment they have averaged benefits of $120,000 per project. Not too shabby. 
PACCAR Announces First Quarter Revenues and Earnings]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Automotive]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:48:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Culture Change Keynote at the Energy Forum]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/culture_change_keynote_at_the_energy_forum.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Again and again, culture change comes up as one of the most important aspects of a successful Six Sigma deployment and reaching maturity. Yet effecting culture change is one of the most difficult parts to master. Almost 50 percent of respondents to a recent iSixSigma survey said their company was far from achieving its desired culture change.
Bringing the topic to the stage at the Energy Forum for Process Excellence is Stephen P. Tomlinson, vice president, operations support, for Cameron. The company provides flow equipment products, systems and services to worldwide oil, gas and process industries through its 11 operating divisions. 
With more than 300 Black Belts and 750 Green Belts, Cameron is moving from a culture of anecdotally based problem solving and improvement to one of a “classic Six Sigma.” The company’s goal is to take Six Sigma to every employee, instilling process improvement at all levels. Takeaways of the presentation:

Settling on overarching themes
Considering the new role of Black Belts and Master Black Belts
The importance of metrics
Deciding on a rollout strategy
Tomlinson’s insight into how 16,000-employee Cameron is energizing improvement in its more than 250 locations through Lean Six Sigma promises to be an informative, engaging presentation.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:15:39 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Focusing on Supply Chains]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/focusing_on_supply_chains.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[With a timely theme of “Completing the Chain,” the May/June 2009 issue of iSixSigma Magazine mailed last week. The cover story, “A Stronger Chain,” focuses on how companies are wielding Six Sigma and Lean to strengthen their supply chains. As companies examine how to get the most out of their efforts, they are reaching outside their walls to reduce waste and variation, and cut costs. 
“Working with our suppliers is becoming a more strategic tactic with the toughening economy,” said Mark Wallace, executive vice president of operations for Pratt Corp., a $67 million company that provides in-store marketing and display materials to retailers.
Key Research FindingsThe research feature, “The Demand for Six Sigma in the Supply Chain,” explores what factors contribute to success and failure in applying Six Sigma in the supply chain. Some key findings:

63 percent of respondents said their company uses Six Sigma to optimize its supply chain
59 percent of respondents said their company uses Lean to optimize its supply chain
Top success factors for applying Six Sigma to the supply chain include support, having reliable data, supplier involvement and teamwork
Top potential failure modes for applying Six Sigma to the supply chain include lack of support for the initiative, not having enough data and limited resources available
You’ll find these features and much more, including the Final Tollgate project review on a DMADV project, and articles on forecasting, Kano analysis and goal setting. Plus, don’t miss a take from Lynn Kelley, vice president of Textron Six Sigma &amp; Quality, on intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation.
If you’re a subscriber, watch for yours in the mail or log in to the digital edition at www.isixsigma-magazine.com/de. Want to sign up? Click here.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:30:05 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Black Belt Project Idea]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/black_belt_project_idea.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 06:55:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Leadership - Important Now More Than Ever]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/leadership_important_now_more_than_ever.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Recently James Considine and Stephen Crate have posted about management styles....and their posts have really made me think about management and leadership in general, especially during these challenging times...
From my perspective, you have to lead people to achieve results.  If you are a manager, indeed your job is to manage the business, but to lead and support people as well, rather than manage them.  Given the right amount of coaching and "rope" if you will, your employees may surprise you in what they are capable of achieving.
I reported to a manager at one point in my career that I would do anything for.  He really led me to higher performance and really coached me in my own management skills - and the things I learned I still use to this day.  He always made clear what my objectives were and basically followed-up on progress on an as-needed basis, rather than telling me which discrete tasks to perform.  It was my responsibility to come up with my own checkpoints and milestones in order to accomplish my goals, and with his input, I would execute the plan.  Granted, there were times that demanded a direct order, but those were in crisis situations which demanded that style.
There are a lot of advantages to leading people to performance - but the biggest advantage is the teaching that occurs during the process.  As a leader, a major responsibility that you have is to teach your employees how to plan and how to achieve goals.  By doing this, you effectively raise the competence level of them, and better prepare them for more responsibility.  This dramatically helps with succession planning for sure, and creates depth in your organization.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Pitbull or Peacenik - What’s Your Change Management Style?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/pitbull_or_peacenik_whats_your_change_management_style.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My colleagues and I have often discussed which type of change manager gets more results, especially which type gets more results in our particular organization. We have a lot of pitbulls, who adopt a fairly confrontational stance when dealing with those who need to make a change. They sink their teeth into the data, make a bulletproof metric, and then proceed to beat their adversaries over the head until the metric moves. Performance is segmented and presented by person, not process. One group goes so far as to designate one general manager “Top Dog” and one “in the doghouse” (complete with a photo of the manager in a doghouse) on their metrics reporting portal each week. 
Seriously. I’m not making this up.
I’ve worked with people like this before – senior management tends to love having people like this around because they force issues, upset the status quo and make things generally uncomfortable for those who need to change. In other words, they do senior management’s dirty work for them.
Like true pitbulls, they don’t let go once they have their teeth into something. They make things happen, that’s for sure. Whether they are always the right things is another matter. 
On the other hand, you have consensus builders – the peacemakers. Short of bringing the guitar to meetings for a round of Kumbaya, they strive for accord. Never mind the fact that consensus means “what everyone can live with”, usually resulting in lowest common denominator solutions, instead of what’s best for the business or the customer. Peers often feel better in meetings led by these folks. They may not make things happen quickly, or make big things happen, but they tend to build a lot of support for whatever the team decides to do.
These are clearly extremes – most of us in the quality field probably have some of each, and have to exercise one over the other depending on the culture of our organizations, the personalities involved with the changes to be made, and the speed at which the changes are needed. These days, speed is probably more important in your firm than comfort – it is in mine.
At the end of the day, we have to be about results. Absolutely. Leadership should care about the process by which we achieve those results, though it often doesn’t.
So what’s your change management style? Has it changed during the economic downturn? Please post your thoughts in the comments section.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:35:47 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Statistical Significance vs. Practical Significance - There Is a Difference]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/statistical_significance_vs_practical_significance_there_is_a_difference.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today I was reflecting on a potential topic that could come up in a traditional project involving any test or DOE utilizing a 'p-value' criterion - it actually did for me a few times in the past.
Hypothetically, say for example there is a process that has very low inherent process variation (process s is very low), with a very high Cp or Pp (depends on how you define s, but say 2.0 or greater), yet has a very low Cpk or Ppk (or Z for that matter - basically the process is hugging or is outside either the upper or lower customer acceptance limits, but very stable at this level), so the situation is characterized as a classical optimization problem.
A black belt performs a DOE, and finds a factor that has a P-value of 0.05 or less on the output.  Using the information, the new factor setting is applied to the process, and the new Z value has barely improved.  The black belt is frustrated, because the factor was 'supposed' to be significant.  What gives?
In this case, the effect of the factor was much smaller than the level of optimization needed to make a real difference.  But the effect was large enough to make a statistical difference based on the low inherent variation level of the process.  A quick check of the main-effects plot (and the coefficients in the analysis for that matter) compared with what's needed to achieve the required optimization would confirm the situation.
So why would this happen anyway?  I've seen some black belts "go by the numbers" (specifically p-values) without looking at the graphics....and without looking at the real picture of what's needed at the output side of the project.
A great teacher once told me to look at the graphs first....he was right.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Small Things]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/small_things.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've attended a lot of leadership development courses over the years, and received many handouts, folders, and binders chock full of ways to make myself into a better manager... of people, time, money, etc.
One precept that has stuck with me is that we should pay attention to the small things that are annoyances today, so they don't become bigger problems tomorrow.  Even if it's unlikely that something will become a big problem, it's worth the effort to eliminate it so that it isn't draining our energy to deal with.
Ben Franklin figured this out long ago, with his saying "A stitch in time saves nine."  As a youngster, I confess that this didn't make much sense to me.  What is a stitch in time?  (Is that a problem in the space-time continuum?)  Saves nine what?  Now I get it - sewing up a small rip saves it from getting larger and needing more stitches to fix later - perhaps after all my money has fallen out of the pocket!  (Just goes to show why I wasn't any good in my Home Economics classes.)  
In my daily work, I try to be on the lookout for those small things - like, my stapler broke and I can't take the time to order a new one, so I have to keep using paper clips that fall off.  Like, my AAA battery died in my mouse but I don't have time to stop and get new batteries from central supply, so I'll use the keyboard alternatives.  Like, one of may chair casters fell off and I've propped it up with a book "for now."
Sometimes it's a matter of looking at things from a lean perspective - kanban or 5S is very helpful.  But it's also the concept of taking time to fix the small things, so that I don't spend a lot of time doing work-arounds which are innately less efficient and less satisfying.
Maybe you have already found this out for yourself - want to share any related examples or experiences?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:59:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Crucial Conversations: Tools For Talking When Stakes Are High - A Review]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/crucial_conversations_tools_for_talking_when_stakes_are_high_a_review.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Every once in a while, I'd like to share some reviews of key books that I've read so far in my career that have been particularly useful.  For my first review, I'd like to reflect upon Crucial Conversations: Tools For Talking When Stakes Are High - by Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, Al Switzler and Steven Covey.
This book has been really key for me in my career thus far (although I still read it cover-to-cover for a refresher).  Having a former position as a Master Black Belt, and now as a manager, now more than ever it's been important to work on my communication skills in difficult situations.  In Six Sigma, we are all change agents of some type or another, so there are always going to be people that resist change or that want to run interference to making progress.  Most likely you have found yourself in a position to have a crucial conversation with these people.  Maybe this book can help.
First, this book is copyrighted 2002, so it has been on the market a while - but -  the information contained is timeless.  The book starts by describing what a crucial conversation is - basically a difficult discussion with the potential for emotion.  After this introduction, the first few chapters afterword describe the mechanics and psychology about emotions and dialog.  I was really shocked at some of the inner workings on how discussions become heated while going through these middle chapters (like I said before, I use some of this material as a critical reference sometimes),   Around chapter 9  or 10, the book moves into practical application of the process of constructive dialog, and in chapter 11, some 'what if' scenarios are presented, which I find very useful to refer to sometimes.
I haven't given any real detail regarding book content in this post, but since I have a few crucial conversations coming up myself, I figured I'd share this gem with you.  It's a simple read, and I really believe you'll get a lot out of the book.
Here's an Amazon link
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Book Review]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Management by Brutality is MUDA]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/management_by_brutality_is_muda.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I can not help but wonder if there is a Six Sigma tool for managers to use before they decide to administer discipline or impose a behavior intervention to a poorly performing employee.  Management style is one of the key factors affecting high employee morale, optimum functioning and low turnover.  When high morale is present, process improvement initiatives are embraced by employees and capacity increases.  Seems some managers still have not learned this universal truth. 
In the private sector the owner of a company does not have to be nice or effective, he or she owns the company.  Long term it is possible for ineffective management to survive if there are mitigating influences among other senior managers.   If you read Henry Ford you see very clearly that he believed that if the owner cares about his employees capacity will increase and be sustained.   
More difficult to accept are managers in the public sector who think the department they manage belongs to them.  They think they can step on, yell at and or berate employees without consequence.  They were appointed by the elected governing body and some believe they are immune to disciplinary actions for poor management decisions or unethical confrontation/intervention with employees.  If a direct service employee publically or even privately criticizes a manager, some time in the near future that employee may receive a  poor performance evaluation and the case to terminate will be opened. This will teach a lesson to the free speech expression in the workplace and further confine direct service employees to keep their opinions to them selves.  In the public civil service environment this seems counter productive. Muda in six sigma speak, if managers are spending their time “going after” employees who is managing the department?  
So what can be done when it is clear that a department manager is ineffective or disrespectful of employees?  Political reality poses that some governing authorities protect its appointees without regard to the truth of their mismanagement or ineffective management style.   It is the job of the governing authorities to confront this manager? No or maybe, that decision is up to the elected authority and how public opinion influences their decisions. But, in the interest of continuous improvement, a much better response is to set a clear professional expectation that self examination, at all times with all work related behavior, is part of the agency management philosophy.  Then managers catch them selves on unethical or questionable actions, hopefully before the action takes place, and ultimately employee morale stays positive or improves and capacity increases with the other process improvement initiatives. If they never look in the proverbial mirror, well… I would like to think most do and really work hard to treat subordinate employees with respect.
That, in an ideal world of work, would be wonderful.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:55:49 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Three Great Workshops at the Energy Forum]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/three_great_workshops_at_the_energy_forum.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There’s no time like the present to study up and learn a few new strategies. I’m a big fan of continuing education and benchmarking best-in-class practices. That’s why I’m excited about the upcoming workshops at the Energy Forum for Process Excellence. Just one problem: I’m having hard time figuring out how to be in more than one place at one time! 
Workshop A: Lean Labor Strategies – Uncovering Hidden Costs and Applying Best Practices From Operations to HRPresented by John W. Frehse, chief strategist and partner, Core Practice LLC, this workshop will start with a foundational education on operations and HR strategies, and end with new insights in low cost labor strategies, flexible scheduling for seasonal environments and specific energy sector solutions.
Workshop B: Lean Six Sigma Practices: How to Maintain Operational Excellence in an Unstable Economic EnvironmentSally Ulman, president, Variance Reduction International Inc., will present on the company’s 7 principles to achieving Operational Excellence. Attendees will review how to apply quality tools and simple statistics to core processes of the oil and gas industry to achieve cost reductions across the entire value stream. 
Executive Workshop: Lean Six Sigma for Executives – Driving Revolutionary Change in the Energy IndustryBob Silvers, managing director, SSA &amp; Company, will talk about the company’s next-stage model for continuous business improvement, Strategic Process Management, and how some of the world's leading companies are leveraging this new methodology to enhance their already strong process cultures to drive their business performance. 
Let me know what’s keeping you up at night and what you’d like to attend a workshop on, even if you can’t make it to Houston.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:12:31 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Survey: Six Sigma and the Economy]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/survey_six_sigma_and_the_economy.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ iSixSigma Magazine’s latest research survey is live!
This survey is all about how the economy is affecting companies and their business process improvement initiatives such as Six Sigma and Lean. 
The survey is short, only 20 questions and about half of them are simple demographic questions. Please invest about 7 minutes of your time and tell us what’s happening at your company.  
The full results will be published in the July/August issue of iSixSigma Magazine, and I’ll surely post the highlights here on the Blogosphere.  Thanks for your support!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:20:48 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Innovation Gone Bad - Here We Go Again]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/innovation_gone_bad_here_we_go_again.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Over the weekend, I happened to stumble upon this news link on Yahoo.
The L.A. Times apparently published a front page advertisement that looked very much like a regular news ad.  Of course upon inspection, the advertisement disclaimer was there.  According to AFP:
"Publisher Eddy Hartenstein told the Times he had decided to run the ad despite protests from the newsroom because he was trying to ensure the newspaper's survival.
'Because of the times that we're in, we have to look at all sorts of different -- and some would say innovative -- new solutions for our advertising clients,' he said."
Here is another example of innovation gone bad in my opinion.  Clearly, revenue has taken a front seat to customer value in this case, with a potential long-term impact to customers and reputation.
 
I'm starting to see a trend here....]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Thinking the Unthinkable]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/thinking_the_unthinkable.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In our BB training we use the terms Divergent &amp; Convergent thinking during the Improve phase. We cover a raft of brainstorming &amp; lateral thinking techniques to encourage people’s divergent thinking. So please take a few moments to answer this question:

How many uses can you think of for a Brick?
How many did you get? Maybe you got just the one, “build a wall”? Or maybe you freely came-up with half a dozen? We could possibly use brainstorming here; try answering the question as if you were Pablo Picasso. Does that work?
Looking in more detail at this took me to Liam Hudson who devised this simple test to illustrate people’s thinking styles. But what Liam did was look deeper into the way we are educated to be Convergent thinkers.
The school system is based on achievement of exam results. This means being able to understand information and produce Model Answers that most accurately match what the examiner wants to see. Being good at this convergent thinking brings its rewards, recognition and good jobs become available. 
Equally to what degree is divergent thinking encouraged. Starting an exam paper with, "I think the real question to answer here is......" or “I have looked at the course curriculum and believe it should be changed here and here”.
So what is the potential impact of focussing on Convergent thinking without balancing Divergent thinking? To what degree do the most successful people across industry focus on having a sense of imagination to challenge an approach? Who were the people who looked at the risks building in the financial system and saw the consequences?
It seems we should be regularly training and rewarding people for Divergent thinking rather than having as a small part of a BB training they might attend.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:36:21 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Before &amp; After]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/before_amp_after.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My organization requires that we write our annual performance goals into a web-based system that can be sent to our bosses for their review.  As I was working on this last week, it struck me that in the past I would not have written those goals the way I do now.
For example, "improve service" would have been a typical goal for one of my previous positions.  Today I'd be examining:  What data will be used to measure the improvement?  What is the target?  What type(s) of service would be in scope?  What customer segment would be studied?  Who are the stakeholders for this service, and how many would have influence or control over aspects of the improvement?
In other words, I'd be a lot more specific - call it SMART if you want - and at the end of the year I could clearly tell whether or not I had met the goal.  In the past, I'd say "well I worked really hard all year on this and I think people are more satisfied with the service, based on the 2 - 3 customers I spoke with."
Now, it's still possible to "game" the system by picking easy targets that would be hard to miss, or choosing focus areas without established metrics.  But, I wonder how much more effective I would have been as a supervisor, manager, or director if I had known and used a process- and metrics-oriented approach to leadership.
So here's my question to my readers!  Have you used a Lean, Six Sigma, or other process-based approach your whole professional career, or did you learn it mid-career?  It would be interesting to know what your reflections on the difference it might have made, had you been exposed to the concepts and methodology earlier in life - I invite you to share.
[Note:  For those who may not have run into this acronym before, SMART refers to goals or metrics that are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound.  There are a few variant versions but all reflect the same basic principles.]]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:40:04 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Purpose of Process Improvement]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/purpose_of_process_improvement.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 10:39:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Does It Get Easier As You Get Better? - It Shouldn't]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/does_it_get_easier_as_you_get_better_it_shouldnt.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Throughout my career I’ve had the pleasure of meeting colleagues from a very large variety of manufacturing cultures.  Sometimes I talk to people that work in a "mass" environment with poor performance, and I hear about how good it must be to work in an efficient workplace, with relatively good performance.  I always get the questions about how easy it is.
Let me tell you...it’s not easy, and by the way - it shouldn’t be.
You might ask me why....and here are some reasons.
The name of the game is continuous improvement.  If your organization doesn’t get better, then you aren’t  going anywhere.  You maintain your improvements be continuously revising your metrics to reflect your improvements.  Your plant may start at 50% production efficiency, then move to 75%, then to 90%, then to 95%, 97%, 99%, 99.5%, etc...how hard do you think it is to go from 99% to 99.5% production efficiency?  It’s very difficult - probably more difficult than going from 50 to 75%.  No doubt, you’re doing much better at 99% than you were at 50%...but then again, the 50% number doesn’t matter anymore, since your system has grown to be much more capable than that.
Now, imagine what it’s like to have this approach with all of the organizational metrics.  The unique part about all of this is that this type of culture grooms people into constantly thinking of how to get better every day.  That’s a powerful element.  
Any people out there living through this type of culture?  What are your challenges and how do you get through them?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Financing Six Sigma Training During Difficult Times - An Option]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/financing_six_sigma_training_during_difficult_times_an_option.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[During difficult times like we’re facing today, some of the first things that get cut are the "non-essential" items not related to core business.  Of course, the paradox here is that some items that are deemed "non-essential" are actually huge enablers to a company.  Take for instance Six Sigma....definitely an enabler, but if your program is in its infancy, it may be easy for it to be placed on the chopping block.
If you fear that your program is getting the ax, an option that you can consider is tapping into a training budget.  Many states (and maybe even other countries - but I’m not sure about that) offer training funding that is independent of operating budget.  You’ll have to check with your appropriate department at your company for the particular rules around this topic, but it may be a feasible option.
Be aware, you will most likely have to separate training from consulting services, but usually it’s just a matter of having your Six Sigma partner separate their quote accordingly.  
You could potentially lessen the blow to your operating budget, which is absolutely sacred in our current operating environment.
Has anyone found other creative ways to finance Six Sigma activity?  I’m always looking for them...;)]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Let Them Be Lean! - Um, What Does Lean Mean?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/let_them_be_lean_um_what_does_lean_mean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Over the years, I’ve come in contact with several different companies that say that they are "lean".  Yes, TPS (the Toyota Production System) is a great framework for production, with its teachings of one-piece flow, kanban, etc...but what about the actual implementation of the lean concepts at other companies besides Toyota?
I’ve seen desks with outlines of where the stapler and the computer monitor should go, yet with no sense of continuous improvement in the culture.  I’ve also seen kanban implemented with min and max levels clearly marked, yet with no safety stock even left due to variation in production downtime.  On the other hand, I have seen a really good "lean" production system operating every day as well, but that has been the exception.  
What’s up here?  It seems like that it is almost impossible to get to real ’lean’ operations unless you actually start up with a lean philosophy.
So here’s a burning question--
Overall, is "lean" a concept that is being actively implemented with success at "mass production", or is it something that is being attempted by doing all of the easy things first while putting off the hard stuff?
As always, your input is always appreciated!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:11:13 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: More Than Advice]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/more_than_advice.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've done a lot of informal coaching in my career - you know, the kind where you're in conversation and someone says, "Gee, Sue, can you give me advice on..." and I get to cheerfully dispense my words of wisdom and then wish them good luck with their problem.  Sometimes people seek me out and ask to talk over things with me, to help clarify an issue or opportunity.  That's also fun and from feedback I've received, people usually appreciate having me as a sounding board.
But I've recently been asked to take on a more formal coaching role with project leaders.  I won't be on the project teams, but I will meet with the project leaders to provide guidance.  Some of my leaders are experienced and some are new to the whole thing; some are using Six Sigma and others Lean.  Mostly I try to tell them things I wish I had known when I started in process improvement, and to give them good advice that they can take or leave at their discretion.  If they run into problems I try to help develop an approach with them.
I'm at ease about technical coaching - tools, methods, reports, etc., but this "soft side" is more of a challenge for me.  
As a "Driver" by nature I worry a lot about subconsciously trying to make them fit into the pattern that works for me, rather than letting them find their own way.  Should I "give them enough rope to hang themselves" and then help them pick up the pieces?  (I've been mentored this way myself and found it to be quite uncomfortable at the receiving end.  On the other hand, I did learn a lot!)  Or should I try to guide them on every foreseeable response and give them Plan A, B, and C for every contingency?  (Over-thinking?)  If they have a different personality style than I do, am I trying to make them more like me because that's what I'm comfortable with?  If I think they are going off-track, do I "give it to them straight" or tactfully share some hints on how it might work better the next time, so I don't discourage them too much?
For those of you who are experienced mentors, can you share any general advice on how to balance the "push" of helping the project leaders to get their project deliverables accomplished, and the "pull" of guiding, aiding, and supporting?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2009 09:57:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Financial Crisis - When Profits Win Over Building Customer Value]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_financial_crisis_when_profits_win_over_building_customer_value.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One of the aspects of Six Sigma that makes the process so great is the focus on the customer, and the gathering of the VOC (voice of the customer).  Using the VOC information a company can begin designing ways to improve customer value, by designing products and processes that are centered around customer requirements.  Doing this effectively maximizes profits while adding value to customers.  In addition to these things, the company begins to build a solid foundation based on business principles that are aligned with customer expectations.  The real advantage gained is the link between the customer and the company.
However, what happens when a company (or an entire industry for that matter) places the highest priority on maximizing profits, even at the expense of customer value?  My opinion is that the current financial crisis is a direct result of mortgage companies doing this very practice.
Let's look at the "pre-bubble explosion" state of affairs in mortgages in general.  How easy was it to obtain an interest-only loan from lenders in the United States?  Virtually anyone could.  How does an interest-only loan add value to the customer?  Short-term, the customer has a lower monthly payment... but is that real value added when the customer's monthly payments balloon in a few years, and the mathematics between annual income and amount borrowed doesn't even make sense?  Since I don't work in the financial sector, I'm not sure, but I have a feeling that there was some hedging going on based on projected property values....
Innovation without regard to real customer value is a disaster waiting to happen, especially when customers perceive that they are getting value.
I will say that the whole interest-only mortgage design is very innovative and for sure is designed to maximize profits.....but ultimately, who is paying the price for all of that "short term" innovation?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 10:10:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Can We Use Six Sigma Tools Outside of Projects?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/can_we_use_six_sigma_tools_outside_of_projects.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One of the things that I see as a challenge to companies that grapple with a Six Sigma implementation is effective use of tools in "live" situations. By "live", I mean in a normal operations context, not in a project context. When looking at the use of Six Sigma tools, using them in a project mode in my opinion is an easier affair. A project leader can plan in a project context which tools to use, based on the DMAIC project model.But what about "live" application of tools? For example, why can’t DOE used to diagnose problems on the factory floor outside of the DMAIC formal context? Consider this:A product is defective, and it is composed of 4 parts. Run a four-factor DOE with the factors being part presence (yes/no) and find the potential contributor(s) and contributing interactions. This will at least give you an idea if the component part inputs are influencing the defective condition, and will get you at least half way to problem resolution.
Most of the time in the case above I’ve seen engineers "measure their way" into a guess of a root cause to the problem, which can be inefficient to say the least.
My opinion is that the real power of Six Sigma comes once culture change sets in and real problem solving occurs as part of the business, and NOT in the form of Six Sigma projects only.  It seems like common sense to me that advanced tools would be used anyway to solve problems, but in most of the different companies I’ve been involved with, I can honestly say that I have not seen much use of the statistical tools in "mainstream" use.
What restrains companies from using Six Sigma tools beyond the DMAIC project scope?
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2009 11:57:02 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: How Many Sigmas Does It Take to Solve a Problem Around Here?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/how_many_sigmas_does_it_take_to_solve_a_problem_around_here.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Tonight I was thinking about some of my experiences since being involved with Six Sigma.  One experience came to mind that when looking back, was so funny in the context of the situation, that I can’t resist sharing it.
I was working on a project that was to improve quality of parts arriving to a particular customer.  This customer was very critical of our shipping quality, and rightfully so - we had some challenges with the product that we were making for that particular customer.  The project had all the essentials of a great project - a clear problem definition, a good scope, variable data to analyze, with process controls that were adjustable (perfect for DOE’s, etc).
I was called into a meeting where we were discussing this product at the customer’s campus, and I (as the project leader of the problem) had to speak on project status.  My audience consisted of various managers, and a senior manager who was running the meeting.  There were probably ten or so people at the meeting, and I was the lowest organizational level person there.  So after a few minutes of initial discussion, I started to give status.  I started explaining how we framed the problem, and how our team established good measurement repeatability through the "Measure" phase.  I stated that our team was in the "Analyze" phase, and I explained our analysis plan.  As I was explaining, I noticed that the senior manager was squirming around in his chair, he seemed to become more and more uncomfortable as I kept explaining.
Finally, he couldn’t resist anymore, and cutting me off he said:
"I don’t care if it takes one sigma, two sigmas, five sigmas or twelve sigmas!  I just want the problem fixed...how many sigmas is it going to take!?"
I was completely taken back by this statement, and all of the managers’ eyes turned to me for my answer.. I was at a loss for words until I managed to muster up a response.  I said:
"A lot"
What else could I say??]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 16:49:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma really sucks!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_really_sucks.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Picking-up on Sue’s recent Home blog, I’d like to talk about my recent experience at home.
Over this weekend my wife and I had  “words” about the work I do helping on the home chores. There were a number of areas such as cooking, washing dishes, ironing, cleaning toilets, shopping, washing clothes, making beds, tidying-up, planning meals, and so on. I had no idea of the number of NVA factories at work and being a strong believer in Six Sigma I committed to resolve this problem. 
I dedicated my Saturday evening and produced what I believe to be a very polished piece of work. I reviewed the key processes and created a core set of current-state value stream maps. For each of these I developed some slick data collections sheets to baseline current performance. I even identified some time saving quick wins. I shared my work and must say I was most surprised by the reaction and being told exactly where to stick my data collection sheets.
But I am a committed practitioner and realised I may have misunderstood the problem statement and goals. It seemed helping to do the chores was more important than improving current performance? So Sunday night I cooked the evening meal and over dinner suggested we discuss our differences. Luckily to support this I had previously produced a fishbone diagram and recommended a rapid brainstorming exercise followed by constraint busting 5-whys to get quick results……. 
Back at work on Monday morning, I am having a tough job trying to explain my black eye. I’m sleeping in the spare bedroom and the kids think I am an idiot. 
Six Sigma really sucks!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2009 01:46:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The 1.5 Shift - Time For A Paradigm Shift?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_15_shift_time_for_a_paradigm_shift.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Years ago (almost ten now!) when I was going through Black Belt training, I remember seeing the famous slide describing what a three-sigma world would look like.  The presentation slide described how three-sigma aircraft landing performance would mean two long or short landings per day, and that 20,000 articles of mail would be lost per day at a three-sigma level.  After completing the presentation, an astute participant in the class asked why 3.4 DPMO was described as six-sigma performance...to him, it seemed like a high level of defects for a true six-sigma process.  
All statistical purists know this is the case, but the instructor started describing how the 1.5 shift and drift effect degrades performance over time, and that this number was used based on historical performance, etc....
Since I've been in a position to coach various individuals in six sigma concepts for some time now, I have to admit that each time I describe the 1.5 shift it gets more and more frustrating.  Here's why:

The 1.5 shift doesn't really hold over time in all cases, so it can be a poor approximation.  I've seen long-term performance influenced by much less than a 1.5 shift and drift factor (sometimes maybe more like 0.5).  Likewise, I've seen much worse (maybe at 2 or 2.5). 
I can't honestly say that from my experience the shift factor distribution is normal, so therefore I can't predict it ;).
Based on this, here's my proposal:

Get rid of the 1.5 shift factor in training, and explain only what long term shifts in the processes do to process performance.  
As a second step, explain how to calculate a short-term and long-term sigma value from a process.
Lastly, make a "continuous improvement" metric out of getting the long-term process sigma value closer to short-term sigma performance levels (minimizing process shifts).
At the very least, the above methodology should make the concept of "long-term shift" more understandable to new practitioners, and make it a practical tool as well.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:10:08 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: From OW to WOW]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/from_ow_to_wow.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The best way to create customer W.O.W. is to consistently provide customers with What’s Needed - On Time - With Value.  In a perfect world it is always W.O.W. time.  But in the real world sometimes things go wrong.  The clothes don’t fit, the food is cold, the hostess is rude, the cable goes out, the list goes on.  What next?   
Customer concerns and/or complaints are not a basic ingredient for W.O.W. but in themselves create an opportunity to turn OW into WOW.  All it takes is RAPID response.  RAPID response considers two elements in fixing a customer’s concern - the operational action and the emotional factor.   Maintaining a positive interaction while fixing a problem or concern can sometimes turn a customer OW to WOW.   But you need both parts - fixing the problem but snubbing the emotional side can leave your customer feeling bruised.   Being empathetic and caring but not getting the problem fixed doesn’t hit the mark either.  It is the right combination of what you do and how you do it that will establish your service level one notch above the rest.  
So next time your customer experiences an OW moment, put RAPID response to work and see if you can turn OW to WOW.
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 03:35:08 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Good Evening, Would You Like Some Nimawashi With That?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/good_evening_would_you_like_some_nimawashi_with_that.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, let me start by saying - its GREAT to be back!  After two years, a LOT can change from both a professional and personal standpoint, and I am really happy to contribute again!
To kick the conversation off, I'd like to talk a little bit about a concept called Nimawashi, which in the Toyota context means building consensus before taking definite action.  Seems like common sense, right?  Well, not always.  Let's look at a case study.
You have a major concept or breakthrough that you need upper management approval on, and you have to present at a decision meeting two weeks from now.  What process do you follow in order to be successful at selling your idea?  You decide to slave over a detailed presentation for the two weeks, sweating the event the whole time leading up to the actual meeting.  The meeting comes, and you present your idea.  At the end of your presentation, the questions start.  VP number 1 asks you a doosy, but you get by with a good answer.  VP number 2 asks you a another question that came out of nowhere, and you weren't prepared for it.  You say the "I'll get back to you on that, sir" line, and in the background you see the president looking at you with a skeptical look.
Needless to say...it didn't go that well - you get the idea.
So how can Nimawashi help you in the above circumstance?  The key enabler of Nimawashi is to allow you to build consensus on a topic before the major decision point.  In this case, the decision point is the meeting.  Using the concept of Nimawashi in the above example, before even beginning the presentation, your first priority is to make appointments with the key VP's one-on-one well ahead of the meeting so that you can present your ideas.  It's a lot easier to convey a new concept on a person-to-person basis instead of a whole audience, and you can also take advantage of the time to allow for questions one-on-one as well.  After a week of brief meetings with the VP's, you now have a week to answer any new questions or tweak your presentation in order to make it perfect for the meeting.  Now, when the event comes along, you have already "pre-aligned" your concepts with the key decision makers, and most likely they have already aligned with the boss (president in this case) as well.  At the end of the presentation, it's most likely that you will get a "rubber stamp" of approval - WHEW!
Now go ahead and implement that great idea!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Kosta Chingas]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:09:55 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean at Work, Lean at Home???]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_at_work_lean_at_home.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was asked a very interesting question last week, after I gave a lecture on 5S.
"Do you find that people who are very organized and who apply Lean or Six Sigma principles at work, also apply these same principles at home?  Is this linked to a personality trait?"
Now I will confess right off that I am NOT always as organized at home as I am at work.  Part of that has to do with the different amounts and types of stresses that are in the work vs home environment, and part of that is related to my particular personality trait or preference if you will.  I am (believe it or not) an introvert by nature.  Now, my favorite definition of the terms introvert and extrovert is not related to being happy in a crowd - but is related to how we recharge our batteries.  Think of a Friday evening, when you have just gotten off work and are heading home.  It's been a long, exhausting week with a lot of extra time spent on the job.  Do you prefer to recharge by (a) going to a party or event with a lot of excitement and energy in the room, or (b) going home or to a quiet place with soft music, a good book or show, and limited interaction?  I'm in the (b) category, so I call myself an "adapted introvert" - most of my work is done with and through people, so at work I'm a driver and always "on" for my audience.  At home I'm a low-energy kinda gal.
So back to the question - my answer was that I know many people who are as driven at home as they are at work - color-coded containers, everything in its place, ready for a surprise meeting or out-of-town guests at a moment's notice.  I also know people like myself who are very organized at work but more laid-back at home.  Truthfully I don't know anyone who is unorganized at work, but very organized at home.  (But maybe I should get out more!)
What do you think?  Do you agree with my categories, and would you have answered the question differently?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:25:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Flu Shot]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/flu_shot.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 08:34:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Why Can’t an Energy Company Win a Shingo Prize?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/why_cant_an_energy_company_win_a_shingo_prize.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
That’s the question that will be answered at one of the anticipated presentations at the Energy Forum for Process Excellence in May (live.isixsigma.com/energy). Presenting will be Steve Wells, Internal Continuous Improvement Consultant at Luminant. The power generation company received the Shingo Prize for Operational Excellence last year. 
The Martin Lake Complex, a lignite-fueled plant and mine complex, received the Silver Medallion and the Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (pictured) the Bronze Medallion, in their first attempts at the Shingo Prize. They prove that this award, often associated with manufacturing operations, is not out of reach for energy companies.
Wells, who has been an examiner since 1999, was instrumental in setting up the program at Luminant and prepared the organizations to be assessed. He will share how the Shingo Prize can be used as a model for guiding and assessing continuous improvement efforts. 
What Is the Shingo Prize?The honor is named for Japanese industrial engineer Shigeo Shingo who helped create and write about many aspects of the manufacturing practices that comprise the Toyota Production System. Established in 1988, the prize promotes awareness of Lean manufacturing concepts and recognizes companies that achieve world-class manufacturing status and business performance.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 12:07:04 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The C Word]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_c_word.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That would be... Consultants.
I was fortunate to have the opportunity to speak about lean for clinical laboratories at the recent Leadership Exchange conference, hosted by the American Society for Clinical Pathology.  In discussions during the conference, I was asked many questions about the use of consultants to get started with lean.  In many cases, stories started with "Our lab has been leaned out," with the consequences of positions being eliminated, front-line workers being unhappy with the standard work that someone else had decided for them, and being asked to clock each and every step of their process for days on end.
So my question is, what is passing for lean these days?  No wonder I hear people saying, "Lean doesn't work!"
Now, I know that there are many fine, upstanding lean practitioners out there, who use strategic planning and the A3 approach to lean deployment.  Maybe I don't hear about them because they're doing a fine, value-added job.  But I do hear many stories about lean gone wrong.
Have you had an experience where someone was claiming to be a lean expert, but it didn't resemble lean philosophy as you know it?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 06:49:30 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Tours de Force at the Energy Forum]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/tours_de_force_at_the_energy_forum.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We have two great tours planned for the Energy Forum for Process Excellence. On Friday, May 22, in Houston, attendees will have the chance to see:
A. Halliburton Drill Bit Manufacturing Plant – Woodlands Facility
B. Cameron Gas Compressor Manufacturing Plant
Picking which one to go to will be a tough decision. And there are a limited number of spots on each.(Also, note: site tour hosts have reserved the right to decline attendees they consider competitors.)
See the full lineup of the four-day Energy Forum at:http://live.isixsigma.com/events/forum/houston/2009/agenda.html
Hope to see you there!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:06:56 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Spring]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/spring.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:10:15 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Halliburton Suppliers Get Lean]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/halliburton_suppliers_get_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There is a great story this morning about Halliburton’s efforts to lead suppliers to Lean and Six Sigma. Having just completed a research feature (to be published in May) on this very subject I can attest the article is a living example of what to do when encouraging suppliers to become more efficient: 
Len Cooper, senior vice president of supply chain, said:

"We actually began to offer them our assistance and expertise, and invest resources, to catalyze them to adopt the same approaches we use internally,"
Lead by example and invest resources.  This often means putting a Black Belt or two on the ground with your suppliers. And why would you want to do that?

"We would rather have our best suppliers grow with us, especially in these times, rather than go out and find more suppliers in order to gain access to additional capacity. We wanted to share our Creativity Over Capital ideas and experiences and benefits with them." 
In the article there are many more nuggets of wisdom from Halliburton for taking Six Sigma to your suppliers... including the tip to start with Lean..hmmm, where have I heard that before? From Rey Moré, Chief Quality Officer, at Motorola.  He said the very same thing at the iSixSigma Live! conference in Miami. 
Halliburton pushes Lean Six Sigma to its supply base, Purchasing.com, March 12, 2009]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Energy]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:29:01 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Is Healthcare the Next Big Thing?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/is_healthcare_the_next_big_thing.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've had a lot pf people asking me about healthcare lately.  As in, "Now that big corporations and the automotive companies are reeling, with the stimulus coming and promises of healthcare reform, isn't it a great time to move out of the manufacturing sector and into process improvement in healthcare?" 
Well, it's true that there are vast opportunities for improvement in healthcare.  No one has the corner on perfection in care processes (although we're all working madly on it, especially now that there's public posting of healthcare quality - check out "Hospital Compare") or in the support processes like patient accounting and billing.  If I had my way, there'd be an improvement professional as a permanent part of every department's budget.
But, just think a moment.  Who pays for healthcare in the US?  First of all, the federal government, which is desperately trying to shrink the amount it pays for healthcare even as it's talking about access for all.  Many hospitals have 40 - 60% of their revenues coming from Medicare and/or Medicaid.  Frequently the government reduces reimbursements with very little warning.  It's an interesting thing, these days, to try to budget for healthcare when your major source of revenue pays 10% - 15% less every six months or so.
Then, there is the second largest healthcare revenue source, and that would be employers.  Specifically, those same big corporations and automotive companies that are in a bit of trouble these days, along with their suppliers and vendors.  As these companies have massive layoffs, and shrink benefits for the remaining workers, what's the outcome?  People will tend to utilize preventative services less frequently (because of those big copays and deductibles).  And out-of-work employees have usually have a little coverage with COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act) benefits, but then may have trouble paying the premiums - thousands of dollars a month.  Therefore, hospitals are bracing for huge increases in emergency care visits which will either be reimbursed at lower rates (Medicare / Medicaid) or not reimbursed at all.  So there will be less revenue there as well.
Now, back to those opportunities.  If you were a hospital executive, knowing that less-costly processes would have a positive impact on your contribution margin, wouldn't you invest heavily in the very people who can do this work for you?  Why wouldn't you want to have a trained group of healthcare Black Belts or Lean Practitioners at your hospital or healthcare company?
Well, because of the decrease in insurance revenue and the hit everyone's pension plan took with the stock market plunge, there just aren't enough dollars to fund everything that needs to be supported.  Hospital executives are having to make hard choices - and believe me, they'll lay almost anyone off before they lose nurses or other direct care staff.
So, while ideally every healthcare company and organization would be heavily into process improvement, the truth is that if you're trying to go from a manufacturing or transactional position into healthcare, it's almost like "out of the frying pan, into the fire."  Admittedly, I'm from Southeastern Michigan where we are really feeling the impact of the uncertainty in the automotive industry.  However, the economic downturn has affected just about everyone in healthcare, whether they were prudent with their pension fund investments or not.
As an optimist by nature, I'm sure we'll pull out of this slump and eventually be able to look on the bright side of life once again.  In the meantime, if you're looking for a healthcare position, do your research and speak with those already involved, so you go in forewarned and forearmed!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:19:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Johnny the Bagger]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/johnny_the_bagger.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This was sent to me by a friend and I thought about how important it is that we view Continuous Improvement as so much more than measurement
http://www.stservicemovie.com/
ON Ward!
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 08:38:54 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Farewell to iSixSigma from Founder Michael Cyger]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/farewell_to_isixsigma_from_founder_michael_cyger.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Dear iSixSigma Readers, Advertisers, Sponsors and Partners, I have notified the board of Schofield Media Group that I will be transitioning out of my role with iSixSigma during the next several months. Despite current economic conditions, iSixSigma is now a stronger company in many ways than it was just 14 months ago when Schofield Media Group acquired it.
A lot of changes have already happened during the last year, but most readers probably didn’t notice. The organizational structure has been transformed to better serve customers, the staff has grown and been augmented by shared services of our parent company, costs have been aligned with current market conditions, and iSixSigma has a clear game plan for growth over the next few years.
Since its inception nine years ago, iSixSigma has become synonymous with an open community for learning about breakthrough process improvement, and is more popular than I could have ever expected. We’ve expanded to a readership of more than 600,000 online and 14,000 in print (and our magazine is award winning!), programmed and organized multiple wildly-successful events, launched a marketplace, developed an industry-leading jobs board, and much more. It’s clear that we have provided a platform that process improvement professionals have found useful and engaging.
I would like to thank the unbelievably competent and dedicated iSixSigma staff for their tireless devotion to the industry, and the board of Schofield Media Group for their support and guidance. I would like to thank the countless named and nameless contributors to the iSixSigma community -- through articles, blogs, presentations, forum posts, dictionary additions, press releases and event contributions. I would like to thank our sponsors, advertisers and alliance partners for their support and involvement. And last but not least, I would like to thank my wife and family for supporting my often all-consuming efforts (including frequent all-night coding binges) on iSixSigma.
So, what happens to iSixSigma? Well, iSixSigma has always been about business professionals helping business professionals -- our staff and technologies have only facilitated the exchange. It is YOUR community. That hasn’t changed, and won’t change. iSixSigma will continue to grow and offer more and more resources for business professionals around the world.
And what’s next for me? Well, like I said, I’m not disappearing overnight. There are a couple of fantastic events coming up (Energy Forum for Process Excellence and DoD CPI Symposium), to which I am contributing. My goal is to gradually make myself obsolete and ensure the team has full control of all iSixSigma areas. After that, we’ll see what happens. I have been approached by a few people about post-iSixSigma ventures for which I feel very fortunate and grateful. My isixsigma.com email address will work for the next several months, and the best way to reach me in the future is through http://www.linkedin.com/in/cyger.
All the best,
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 01:05:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean Federal Contract Process]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_federal_contract_process.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Saw an article this week in the Federal Computer Week emagazine about our new President making federal contracting more efficient.  This is great news and about time.  http://fcw.com/articles/2009/03/04/obama-reforms-contracting.aspx?s=fcwdaily_050309
This looks very promising for the Lean Government Champions. Sounds like a job for a Continuous Improvement Practitioner.  Are there any CI-P's in the federal government yet?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:07:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Edgar Allan Poe was a Black Belt]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/edgar_allan_poe_was_a_black_belt.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered weak and weary,O’er Breyfogle, George, and other volumes of forgotten lore,While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping,As of someone gently rapping, rapping at my office door.‘’Tis some Green Belt,’ soft I muttered, ‘working late on his R4 –Only this, and nothing more.”
Ah, distinctly I remember it was in the bleak December,And binders of Six Sigma projects lay like ghosts upon the floor.Eagerly I wished the morrow; - vainly I had sought to borrowFrom “Lean Thinking” ease of sorrow – sorrow for the lost Lean lore,For the rare and radiant flowing caused by using pure Lean lore,Flow of process evermore.
Back to my Cox Comics turning, all my soul within me burning,Soon again I heard a louder tapping, harsher than it was before.‘Surely someone’s working late, trying to finish their last tollgate,I don’t want to make them wait – I must this mystery explore - Let my heart be still a moment and this mystery explore; -‘Twill take a moment – nothing more!’
So I flung the doorway wide, and, without a glance aside,In there stepped a stately figure I could not in truth ignore.Not the least of hand-shakes made he; not a minute stopped or stayed he;Bold and mute and unafraid he came within my office door – Looked like young Shigeo Shingo coming in my office door –Looked, and sat, and nothing more.
Then this silent form amazed me by the way his silence dazed me,By the look of grave intelligence and utter thoughtfulness he wore,‘Thou thy head be shorn and shaven, thou’ I said, ‘art sure no raven.Ghastly grim and ancient maven wandering from the shop room floor –Tell me what thy lordly name is, teacher, I do thee implore!’Quoth the Sensei, ‘Nevermore.’
‘What?’ asked I, merely guessing what the Sensei was expressingAs his fiery eyes burned through my scattered R4s on the floor;Was he looking for my A3s, did he doubt my CTQ trees,Did he think my 5-Whys weak and my lead times so very poor?‘What!’ I shrieked, ‘You think my methods and my computations poor?’Quoth the Sensei ‘Nevermore.’
‘Trickster!’ said I, ‘Thing of evil! – Causing waste by this upheaval!It’s not Pull that brought you calling!  By the Flow we both adore –Tell this soul with deadlines harried if, within locations varied,Through deserts hauled or rivers ferried, I can find the lost Lean lore –Perhaps a book that you have written, penned to share the pure Lean lore?’Quoth the Sensei, ‘Nevermore.’
‘Be that word our sign of parting, foul-mouthed fiend!’ I shrieked upstarting –‘Get thee back into the workplace and your own shop’s gemba floor!Leave no A3 as a token of the word that thou hast has spoken!Leave me with my mind all broken! – quit the chair that’s near my door!Take thy Wastes and 5S forms and take thyself right out my door!Quoth the Sensei, ‘Nevermore.’
And the Sensei, not submitting, still is sitting, still is sittingNear the photo of Jim Womack framed above my office door;And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon’s that is dreaming,And the lamp-light o’er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor;And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floorShall be lifted – nevermore!
(With apologies to Edgar Allan Poe, whose poem "The Raven" was written in 1845.)]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:33:54 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Managing the unmanageable]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/managing_the_unmanageable.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As I was getting into the cab outside Sheraton Saigon, the concierge guy handed me a small square piece of paper. "What’s this for?", I asked, without really looking at what was handed to me. 
"In case you have trouble with the driver sir.", the concierge guy answered. It was a small feedback form allowing hotel guests to rate their cab drivers. Don’t think I would have the need for it though, I thought. The airport ride’s just a 7km-distance, 45-60 minutes. I took the form anyway. It was so tiny one wouldn’t call it a form. 
Well, I did hit a little cab trouble. Upon reaching the Tan Son Nhat International Airport the driver insisted that I pay for a ’parking ticket’ which I would not; translating into some unpleasantaries on his part. I finally got out of the cab, very upset, after paying the correct fare. The form came a little handy in facilitating my complain to the hotel as the concierge guy had written the cab ID on it earlier. 
A few weeks later I did have the opportunity to ask the Director of Rooms how on earth the hotel manages a process which are out of the hotel’s scope of processes. As I found out bad cab rides are one of the major reasons why people don’t return to Vietnam. No guessing whether this impacts on hotel guest experience in the check-out process or not. Well Andy related to me that his hotel works closely with the Tourism Board and cab company ensuring feedback is directed back to the cab company and to that particular cab driver. Apparently the hotel takes a serious stance against errant cab drivers trying to make a fast buck. 
On my next visit I don’t think I’ll ever run into the same guy again in cab 256.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Vincent Chin]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:11:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Sampling Poser]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/sampling_poser.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I thought I would share my views on a question frequently posed by newly trained belts. I imagine you to may have encountered this situation. I do not have a clear answer but have come-up with a theory. Could be right, could be wrong. 
We talk about the discrete sampling equation used to calculate minimum sample size
Minimum Sample Size = Square of (1.96 / Precision) * Est. Proportion * (1 – Est. Proportion)
For example, what is the sample size required to find, within 5%, the number of people who are left-handed using a starting assumption that 10% of the population are left-handed?
Minimum Sample Size = Square of (1.96 / 0.05) * 0.1 * (1 – 0.1) = 138
But what people ask is, what if there are more than two categorise? What if you want to know the sample size required to find the proportion of calls split into:

New Business Quotes 
Renewal Quotes 
Change of Service Quotes 
Administrative
Now I haven’t been able to find much of an answer to this question. I have come-up with a theory but I do not think it is statistically robust. Interested on comments and if there is an off-the-shelf statistical solution I have missed and can apply:

Build an exploratory sample- Start by assuming each category is equally weighted. So the estimated proportion for each is 25%. Using quite a wide precision (e.g. 10%) you get the sample size of 72. - To allow for the extra categorise multiple by the total number and divide by two, hence 72 * 4 / 2, to give a final sample size of 144. The result gives you a “feel for the proportions” but is by no means accurate.
Develop the proportions- You now have a feel for the proportions e.g. 60%, 30%, 10%, &amp; 10%. - Because sampling theory says that 50% proportions require the highest sample size use the proportion nearest to 50%. In this case the 60% one.- Calculate your sample size based on 60% so using 5% precision you get 369- Including the extra factor to allow for multiple categorise you get 369 * 4 /2, to give a final sample size of 738- You can then find your confidence interval from the results obtains
I have made-up this approach and have no idea if it will stand-up to scrutiny. Hopefully I am on the right-track. 
You never know it might become true like 1.5 sigma-shift…… ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:55:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Winter Defects]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/winter_defects.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Quarter Reports Praise Lean Six Sigma]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/quarter_reports_praise_lean_six_sigma.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Can Lean Six Sigma help companies get through this economic downturn? Dale Barnhart, President and Chief Executive Officer at Lydall thinks so.  In the Lydall 4th Quarter Earnings report he said: 

"I can’t emphasize enough the importance of Lean Six Sigma to Lydall in light of the current economic conditions. In 2008, the Company realized significant savings from lean initiatives. Going forward, we will continue to focus on Lean Six Sigma to drive operational excellence, improve our performance to customers enabling increased market penetration, reduce working capital, and improve our competitive cost position."
Lean Six Sigma has been getting plenty of press in the quarterly earnings reports over the past few weeks:
Cooper Tire &amp; Rubber: "On a positive note, investments in automation, lean, Six Sigma and other projects continued to show improvement on the bottom line as we improved underlying manufacturing operations in spite of higher utility costs."
NewPage: "During the fourth quarter, to manage through these challenges and because of lower customer demand, we took market- related downtime of approximately 60,000 tons, reduced our capital spending, and kept our workforce focused on driving down costs. Lean Six Sigma projects and productivity initiatives have dramatically helped to reduce the effects of inflation. During the year, employees across the company participated in projects generating more than $65 million of annualized savings."
LAI International: "We are committed to continuous improvement and will focus on a number of major performance initiatives to drive improvement throughout the company, including operations, quality, engineering, customer service and sales. The company will continue to invest in Six Sigma quality management methods and lean manufacturing initiatives."
US Oncology: "Our lean six sigma program has improved efficiencies in our care delivery and drug management processes in over 50 percent of our largest practices." (US Oncology is a cancer care services company. Yet another place you can find Six Sigma...fighting cancer!) 
And so we see Six Sigma is important to these diverse industries during these adverse times. Is Six Sigma important to your company right now? ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Six Sigma Articles &amp; News]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:46:58 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Intelligence Status Report]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_intelligence_status_report.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After a long and extended absence, I am back to share some practical tips to help your Six Sigma program in times of economic turmoil. For starters, during the measure and analyze phases of a project, any of my readers know I talk about, this point of all projects and the introduction of BI, or business intelligence. 
Business intelligence represents the data within organizations that helps operationally drive, tactically drive and strategically drive better, more data driven decision making. Six Sigma, in parallel, is a process and quality methodology for reducing variation, defects, or increasing quality. 
Use this template as a starting to do list and status report out for all BI related project tasks. Click here for form
Sample Project Task Status Report]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Laura Gibbons]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:06:26 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Supply Chain Research]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/supply_chain_research.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Over the last couple of weeks I’ve been pouring over the latest iSixSigma survey results about the use of process improvement methodologies and models in the supply chain.  So far I’ve found a couple of interesting things…
1. Success factors for implementing Six Sigma in supply chain are pretty consistent with implementing Six Sigma anywhere:

Image created at http://www.wordle.net/
2. Six Sigma and Lean are pretty evenly used by companies to improve supply chain operations. The real question though is, do companies that use Six Sigma also use Lean? And visa versa. For that you’ll just have to wait…
The full research will be printed in the May/June issue of iSixSigma Magazine. For those that responded to my email I invitation last month and completed the survey, the full results will be delivered to you via email shortly after the Magazine goes out. Thanks.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Feb 2009 04:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Targets – Part 2]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/targets__part_2.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In my last blog, Targets, I covered the situation of hitting time targets in a services environment. I thought I was onto something but wasn’t sure just what…….. 
Just to recap, people are targeted on delivering work within a certain time frame e.g. reply to a customer letter within X number of days. There was an understanding that this “drives the wrong behaviours” but no clarity on what to do. Here is what I have come to. 
What I did was look at the current measure and split time into value and non-value as shown.

Then I looked at the two time components and put together two principles:
1. The time an item is waiting in a queue should not be the handler’s problem; it’s a management problem. The idea of pushing people to “work harder” because of variation in demand doesn’t work and alternative solutions are required.2. The time that a handler is working on an item should not be driven by a time target but should be against a quality target. We want our people to do a great job as quality drives down rework, defects and costs.
Now the tricky bit, how to translate these principles into actual measures. What I looked for were rules for defining the measures and came to these from Vanguard


The measure should help in understanding and improving performance – capability measures rather than targets

The measure must relate to purpose – measure what is important to the customer

The measure must be integrated with work – the measures must be in the hands of the people who do the work
 Looking at these and my principles I came-up with two measures:


Lead Time - The time from receipt to when work starts. Leadership and not handlers own this. They are responsible for improving Lead Times by changing the system not “cracking the whip”

Right First Time – This is not a time measure but a quality measure. For each step in the process, the “Must-do” &amp; “Optional” requirements are defined. These are the items that ensure the work is done correctly without defects being created. It is as simple as a check-list to ensure work is done as required.
The approach extends across the whole life-cycle. This splits the process into value and non-value adding steps. It focuses the right people on doing the right things – leadership to reduce Lead Time by reducing waste in the process – handlers to improve Quality by defining, doing and measuring what is required. 
Sound good? I am already getting challenges and resistance. Would appreciate comment on the logic and how I could make the proposal even better….. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 10:18:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Gemba Academy Intro to Lean]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/gemba_academy_intro_to_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you'd like to take a beginner's course on Lean, look to Ron Pereira's Gemba Academy.  He has released his first video, Introduction to Lean Manufacturing. The clip below (and on the LSS Academy site) is the first 10 minutes of the 15 minute intro to Lean. Don't waste another minute in Lean ignorance...


]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:05:28 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Puts the Shush! on Library Inefficiencies]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_puts_the_shush_on_library_inefficiencies.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
This morning as I was reading my Six Sigma news feeds, I came across a mention of the Columbus Metropolitan Library (CML) crediting Lean Six Sigma for their high service ratings. 
The use of Lean and Six Sigma outside the traditional business setting intrigues me…so I investigated further…It turns out that back in 2005 CML identified the combination of Lean and Six Sigma as the best fit for improvement at the Library and started right in using these methodologies as a way to reach their strategic objective to provide excellent customer service.  
In 2006, one of CML’s own Quality &amp; Process Specialists, Shaunessy Everett, wrote an excellent story about the initiative for Library Journal. This article is very well written, entertaining and very informative. Since this story is about a library, you’ll have to read it for yourself (no cliffs notes or summarizations here).Do More, Better, for Less, Library Journal, Sept. 2006
It’s not just Six Sigma that makes CML great.  Patrick Losinski, Executive Director at CML, is featured in a SmartBusiness article that highlights additional management philosophies embedded at CML that keeps them on the cutting edge. Nonprofits: Patrick Losinski, SmartBusiness, Dec. 2007
Six Sigma at CML is not an anomaly in the library business. Houston Library as well as a few academic libraries have been reading up on the very Six Sigma books they shelve.  Sarah A. Murphy, Associate Professor, University Libraries, Ohio State University, wrote an extensive paper titled “Leveraging Lean Six Sigma to Culture, Nurture, and Sustain Assessment and Change in the Academic Library Environment.”  And Dong-Suk Kim wrote, "A Study on Introducing Six Sigma Theory in the Library for Service Competitiveness Enhancement."
The next time you’re in Columbus, Ohio, be sure to visit the Columbus Metropolitan Library and check out Six Sigma.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:13:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Big Why]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_big_why.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:30:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Continuous Improvement is More Than Measurement]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/continuous_improvement_is_more_than_measurement.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Andrew’s recent reflections about the relevance of continuous improvement practitioners in these times mirror my thoughts with an added perspective.  If lean thinking and continuous improvement were only about measuring production and process I would wholly agree.  However, continuous improvement, in my mind, is more about positive change and moving toward perfection than it is specifically about process measurement.  Measurement of tasks completed and widgets made is one of many ways to determine if you are improving.  
Measurement of production tells you if you are meeting your goals.  It is a way of keeping score.  What about measuring the quality of life, attitude, self assessment, compassion, selflessness as it relates to employees and their families?  Certainly change and improvement is needed is this arena, a least for some corporate leaders. (peanuts and publically funded retention awards immediately come to mind).  
The tools of our trade cannot only include strategies to improve the measurement and thus quality of a process but must include teaching other less finite but still important concepts and work strategies related to maintaining a positive attitude in light of hard times.  If you re-read Henry Ford and see some of thepotentially overwhelming challenges he faced while developing his product and process, you will see this added tool of continuous improvement  being used. 
We are more than our measuring tools. We are human beings working towards perfecting work processes and in some cases the people that control those processes.  If we focus only on the process, we run the risk of making the people obsolete.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:20:39 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: WWDD?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/wwdd.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Perhaps you all arrived at this conclusion way ahead of me, but I’m starting to worry more and more about the way we, as continuous improvement professionals, are spending our time.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that the world in general, and the economy in particular, has gone off meds. Yes, I know, this isn’t news at this point. But lest you think I’m the last one to get the message, seek out the open letter that John Stumpf, The CEO of Wells Fargo, recently placed in the New York Times and elsewhere. He was explaining his view on “the value of team member recognition”…which apparently boils down to paid travel to fun places in his mind. Clearly there’s at least one other person slower on the uptake than me.
The press has been all over this letter, including this piece by Maureen Dowd. I don’t have anything to say about it that hasn’t already been said by smarter people. But it does highlight that there is a true shift going on out there. What used to be reasonable, even commendable, has become detestable.
Deming exhorts me to create constancy of purpose, and Wheeler explains to me why reacting to random variation is a bad thing. I feel I have both and intuitive and statistical understanding of “special cause”, and I try to apply that understanding to the work in front of me. Usually that means resisting the tendency to chase special causes in favor of common cause work, and for a long time I have been confident that was the right thing to do.
But now? A lot of things are changing. Those changes feel drastic. Is it time to react in a special way? Or is this just fluctuation of the larger system? Do we keep running our Six Sigma programs, Lean initiatives, and Quality Management systems and wait it out? Or has the time come to move on to changes and initiatives that are more radical and sweeping? More special? Deming does advocate constancy of purpose, but in the next breath he points out the need to adopt a new philosophy for a new economic age. Which advice applies now? What would Deming do?
Let me offer a few more things to think on to frame this question. Continuous improvement programs usually rely on projects as units of work. Using various toolsets, each project is able to return more value to the organization than they consume in money and resources. Group a bunch of these projects together, add up the saving, and you have a program.
Successful programs might generate 5% productivity each year. In other words, if we do things right, we might produce 105% of what we produced last year for the same amount of money. Or maybe we produce the same amount for 95% of the cost. You get the idea. For the past several years, maintaining that sort of incremental improvement in consecutive years was a great result. 
But now? Your sales are down 80%. Your raw material cost are up 150%. You can’t spend $100,000 even for a guaranteed return of $125,000 because credit is frozen. Double digit percentage layoffs abound. In this environment, that ongoing 5% productivity that was great a few years ago is less than a rounding error compared to the huge swings that are happening largely outside our control.
Take Wiremold as a cautionary example. If you are reading this blog, there’s a good chance you already know something about this company from Womak and Jones’ book “Lean Thinking.”
Great company, hugely strong in Lean, right? Well, read this. Sure, there were clearly other factors involved, and maybe their commitment to Lean isn’t as strong as back in the day. But anyway you slice it, this is a titan in the continuous improvement world staggering from a serious blow. Lean can’t help if there is no demand. You can’t save your way to top line growth. It doesn’t matter how efficient you are if no one has money to buy what you are selling.
I think we at least need to ponder whether anything that we are doing matters at this point. Whether we are maybe even part of the problem. It’s easy to spank Wall Street CEOs as they assume the position in front of Congress, but are we just as guilty of failing to confront a new reality?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Six Sigma Lift]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/the_six_sigma_lift.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As a former forklift operator, I can understand the complexities of forklift operations. I know absolutely nothing about forklift manufacturing, but one could argue that it might be harder to operate a forklift than build one...
The very first Six Sigma project I ever heard about involved a forklift. It perked my interest, because naturally, I knew my way around a lift.  I was reading Harry and Schroeder’s Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations my first day as an intern for SSA &amp; Company, when I came across one of the Ploymerland (division of GE) Black Belt projects.
With customers threatening taking their business elsewhere, employees were trying to figure out why there was so much damage to delivered goods.... After using Six Sigma tools to identify the root cause, turns out the characteristics of the forklift as well as forklift operator experience played roles in damaging the goods.  Instead of training lift operators or hiring the most experienced, the simple and least expensive solution was installing shorter forks on every lift, eliminating the opportunity for puncture damage altogether. I remember thinking, "Wow what an easy fix to a problem you didn’t know you even had."
Six Sigma has come full circle since Polymerland - From forklifts being the root causes of defects in Six Sigma projects, to manufacturers using Six Sigma to build better forklifts more efficiently.  Such is the case at Crown.  Six Sigma has saved the company about 1.5 million so far. Not too shabby. 
Crown Embraces Continuous Improvement, forkliftaction.com, Jan 29, 2009]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Automotive&nbsp;,&nbsp;Industrial]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 13:58:32 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Sensei Sue???]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/sensei_sue.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was talking with a group of people about leading lean, and someone asked me, "Are you a Sensei?"
So of course I said "No!"  I don’t call myself a Sensei, because I consider myself to be at the grasshopper-level of lean expertise.
However, the question did make me think.  I call myself a Black Belt without blinking an eye - on the checklist of how to be a Black Belt, I have filled in all the boxes:  [ ] Go through formal classroom training with hands-on practice and exercises. [ ] Be mentored in leading a project team through a Six Sigma DMAIC project, with all the bells &amp; whistles (graphical, statistical, and lean analysis). [ ] Get seal of approval in the form of a signed certificate from the MBB teaching the class. [ ] Fulfill additional years of leading Six Sigma teams with demonstrated tangible &amp; intangible benefits. And, because I’m an overachiever, [ ] Obtain certification from a national professional organization so my credentials would be a little more portable/marketable (being honest about it!).
So why don’t I call myself a Sensei?  What’s the checklist for that?  One of my teachers told me it would take leading hundreds of lean projects.  There’s a lot of debate about whether Lean practitioners should get into the certification race.  I’m starting to see jobs posted that require "certification in lean."
Are you a Sensei?  Do you know anyone who is?  And what does that mean?  Inquiring minds want to know!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 08:50:27 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Project Selection Process]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/project_selection_process.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 10:15:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Defects in Healthcare]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/defects_in_healthcare.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Last Friday I taught a Lean Leadership class for my healthcare organization.  The participants included all levels of support staff, physicians, nurses, and department leaders.  They grasped the concepts easily, and we had a lot of fun with the simulation exercise.  In the first round, of course, no products made it to the customer.  In the second round, after applying 5S and reducing batch size for better flow, a few products made it to the customer but with some defects.  
In the third round, after applying takt time and level loading, more product units made it to the customer but with even more defects.  This prompted an interesting discussion, as we were reviewing the cost of defects (in our simulation, a delivered product brings revenue of $100 per unit, defects cost $20 and Work In Progress $5).  One of the physicians brought up a great point - what is the "cost of defects" in healthcare?  
In the most purely commercial aspect, the cost of poor quality is the cost of rework and so-called service recovery.  In a risk-managed world, you might add in the cost of potential law-suits and malpractice insurance.  You can even go so far as to put a value on the person's life, for example the number of years remaining of potential employability, and possible value and/or contributions to family, employers, and community.
But the defect that the physician was talking about was the defect of an adverse outcome for a patient.  And it was obvious that every single person in the room had a dedication to the safety of every one of the patients under their care.  So we talked about the cost of a defect related to patient safety, and that the lives under their care were literally "priceless" regardless of what the risk-adjusters might say.  And we can have a huge impact on that safety by using Lean concepts and tools, and integrating the check-do-check into our processes, while streamlining the work and empowering healthcare professionals to call "Stop!" when they see something that may not be right.
The rest of the exercise went very well - the fourth round was organized around a pull system adjusted to takt time, incorporating check-do-check.  The customer had just the right number of units, WIP was minimal, they made money, and they had no defects.
But the memory that I will take from this class is the absolute dedication that this group had to the welfare of their patients.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2009 06:25:32 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Grapes of W.O.W.]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_grapes_of_wow.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In my December blog I touched on customer feedback and understanding how to translate this feedback into action.  It is important to analyze variation in customer feedback to fully understand how customers feel.  For example, if your customers rate you a "7" on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the best), do your customer ratings range from 6 to 8 or do they range from 4 to 10? What would you do with this information?
First, segmentation of customer feedback is critical.   But before you can slice and dice all the data, you need to figure out what information needs to be gathered to allow for meaningful ’slicing and dicing’.   Age, demographic, location, product usage, the list can become quite unwieldy if no prework has been done.   In most cases, one size does not fit all.  Before you launch into a huge customer survey, defining  your ’slice and dice’ variables is critical or all you will end up with is a bunch of data.  Sort of like a bunch of grapes.  As we learned from Kaj Ahlmann at the iSixSigma Live Summit, you’ve got to have better sorting than "green" and "purple" to make a fine glass of Six Sigma wine.  
Once you’ve been able to appropriately segment your feedback, you can start looking at the satisfaction level of various groups and identify if ratings "within and between" various segments are the same or statistically different.  Once you have great segmentation and analysis, then the hard part begins - answering the following questions . . . 

Which process drives the customer satisfaction metric that you are evaluating?
What is the variation in the process?
Is the variation in the process correlated to the variation in customer satisfaction? 
If the process is stable but the customer feedback has lots of variation, there is most likely another variable that may be driving satisfaction or dissatisfaction.  If the process has a lot of variation, it is worth exploring to see if the process variation is indeed driving variation in customer satisfaction.  
Soon it may become clear that there are two types of  process issues that are reflected in the satisfaction levels.   Some may involve processes that have little variation but clearly need to move up a notch to improve satisfaction.  On the other hand, feedback may show a large process variation  (resulting in scores of 4 to 10).  This feedback is interesting because it identifies a small group of customers that are highly satisfied (those providing a 10 rating).  All else being equal, should you first focus on the process that requires reduction in variation  or take a good process (little variation) and try to move it up a couple of notches?   
In this particular example, I’d pick the process that has the most variation and set an objective to reduce the variation using best process performance as the target mean.  The reason I picked this approach is that the process has already proven its ability to satisfy at a ’10’ level so I already have data related to what a ’10’ performance looks (and feels) like to the customer.  If the process has little variation and customer ratings range from 6 to 8, trying to define what a ’10’ may feel like to the customer will require further research and customer feedback to determine the process improvement target (worth pursuing at a later time). 
Some of you out there may agree or disagree with this approach.  It would be interesting to hear your thoughts. 
The one thing that I think we can all agree on is that when faced with a ’bunch’ of stuff to improve, we should try to ’pick’ the types of things that can make the biggest difference to our customer and go for it.  The only bad choice is to not make a choice and do nothing.  And when you do nothing your Grapes of W.O.W. will surely turn into Sour Grapes.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2009 09:45:17 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: This Should Come As No Surprise]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/this_should_come_as_no_surprise.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[AIG Said to Offer $1 Billion in Retention Payments to Employees As it turns out, this how AIG is choosing to spend part of the $150 Billion it received from the US Government, with much of it going to the very business units that caused AIG to falter in the first place. While the company maintains that these payments are part of contractual agreements that were disclosed in regulatory filings, the optics are horrible. Says one congressman, “I was extremely disappointed -- but not surprised -- to learn that AIG will be awarding bonuses to the very division that drove the company into the ground...”  
Why comment on this in a Six Sigma blog? To me it serves as an object lesson about the Improve/Control phase. So much of a Black Belt's time seems to be consumed by data gathering and analysis, measurement system analysis, and development of metrics. Analyze gets a fair bit of attention, although really identifying the true root causes can be extremely difficult. But the real devil is in the details - how is the improvement going to be designed, implemented, validated, and then controlled? GE Energy's CEO recently commented that a powerpoint and a plan isn't enough; it takes digging in deep to find the problems and develop robust solutions. 
Those of us at companies that have been doing Lean Six Sigma for several years may find that certain project areas are perennial favorites; the problems never get solved. Truly achieving control over processes (especially transactional ones) requires diligence, detailed procedures and training, regular audits and performance reviews, and corrective action when the outcomes deviate from requirements. In short, things that aren't nearly as much fun as drawing big red X's through non-value-added steps on a future state Value Stream Map.
So back to our disappointed, but not surprised, congressman. I have to ask - if you're not surprised, how could you have expected AIG to do any different? Why didn't the terms of the bailout cover such details? Didn't anyone analyze the situation sufficiently to uncover these possibilities - perhaps a quick FMEA? Did congress and the administration just hope that AIG would do the "right" thing with the bailout funds? 
Hope isn't a strategy - not in billion dollar government programs, and not in achieving performance excellence.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:50:52 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Photos of Miami Live!]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/photos_of_miami_live.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ 
Photos stream of the iSixSigma Live! Summit and Awards in Miami. 
To browse all photos and download your favorites visit: 
http://photos.isixsigma.com/gallery/7136980_gHfnR]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:53:28 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: What Sigma Value is your Food?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/what_sigma_value_is_your_food.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It seems like a month can not go by without some large scale food recall, with the latest being approximately 31 million pounds of peanut butter (due to salmonella contamination). I started to wonder what the sigma level for the aforementioned peanut butter would look like. According to a major news website, at least 500 people had been affected by the contamination, definitely an error when listening to VoC.  Assuming 500 illnesses with a batch size of 31 million pounds, I get a sigma value of 5.66. Of course this assumes batch size is the right opportunity to count. 
When I teach Six Sigma, there is a slide explaining how sigma values are calculated followed by another slide with sample values for given industries.  An example of an industry with a 6 sigma plus rating is airline safety.  Most industries will operate around a 2-3 sigma value for a given process. An example of a process that typically operates around 3 sigma is the accuracy of restaurant bills. In other words, the process is 93.3% accurate or for every one million bills, or 66,800 will have an error.
So as a consumer, should I be happy with a food that currently has a value of 5.66 sigma?  Is the media overreacting? I decided to do some research.  I googled DPMO and food and after 14,000 hits, decided to narrow my search to the FDA website.  The first thing I saw was a listing of over one hundred foods affected by the recent recall. Now if I assume a batch size per product or per manufacturer my number of opportunities just decreased significantly, however without a firm number of defects provided by the manufacturer, it would be impossible for me to calculate DPMO on a given brand name product.  
I found my search proved better when I changed from DPMO to PPM (parts per million). It turns out the FDA has an entire handbook on what number of defects are acceptable for all foods.  For example, the FDA considers a maximum defect level of 2% or more for apricots harvested for canning that have been damaged or infected by insects as acceptable.  A 98.2% defect fee yield translates into a sigma value of around 3.6.  Okay, so the process is better than restaurant bill accuracy but I’m not sure as a consumer I’m happy with this value (good thing I don’t eat apricots). 
Looking at coffee beans, if a batch is less than 10% insect infested/damaged, it is considered acceptable. This translates into a sigma value of around 2.8.  So I have a higher quality level with baggage handling at the airport (around 4 sigma) than purchasing green coffee beans. As someone who’s had their bags incorrectly routed twice, the results are unsettling.
In addition, the FDA website lists multiple types of defects (mold, insects, contamination, etc.). This gives one the availability to calculate DPU for some foods. After viewing the website (http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/%7Edms/dalbook.html), I’m not any more worried about the peanut butter outbreak compared to any of the other foods I eat.  Product traceability has allowed companies to pinpoint the exact extent of risk involved with the peanut butter and recall any questionable product. Whereas with other foods you purchase, the threat for defect is still there; it just isn’t as widely publicised by the media. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Holly Hawkins]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:43:22 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Excerpts: Panel with Mikel and Don]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/excerpts_panel_with_mikel_and_don.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Michael Cyger moderated a panel with Mikel Harry and Don Linsenmann.  Together they put on a good show, fielding questions from Mike as well as the audience. Don, as usual, instill humor into just about every story he tells.   On the economy and Six Sigma: 

Don: "We’re all impacted by this downfall. Take initiative. Let the Six Sigma process manage the layoffs. Differentiate which markets are growing. Look at each division. Not something across the board. It’s a hard, tough problem. Six Sigma needs to be a part of it."  
Mikel: "Get back to basics.  Not incremental, but breakthrough. Time to reexamine everything you do.  Have the courage to lead. You lead people to breakthrough, not manage them to breakthrough."  
Q: If starting Six Sigma in retail, from middle management, how do you convince the CEO?  

Mikel: “Pray. Middle-out is a hard row to plow.” 
Don: “You must give CEO water-tight compelling data.”
Q: Where is Six Sigma going in the next few years?

Mikel: "Broadening and decreasing in depth. Consultants are watering down Six Sigma. We need need to police ourselves. The proliferation of books on the market is risky. Corporations think they can undertake Six Sigma on their own. The role of coaching is going to become more important. Are we doing the right thing, or the thing that’s right? The time has come that our industry needs breakthrough.  Now the time to apply Six Sigma to ourselves."    
Don: “Stick to the pillars.  ‘Adapt’ is the viable energy that keeps Six Sigma alive. Adaptive is the one word, but it needs to be constrained by what the pillars are.  It’s difficult.”
Don on “If you had a time machine and could start over with Six Sigma in 1999…”: "I’d run Six Sigma time faster than we did.  We were on a pace, we should have sped up the time.  Looking back it was possible to do things faster." 
Mikel on breakthrough: “Breakthrough is not crawl-walk-run. It’s take the leap of faith.”
Don on behavior that keeps Six Sigma alive: “Enthusiasm.”  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:05:51 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma and Supply Chain]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_and_supply_chain.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As an iSixSigma Blogs reader I invite you to participate in iSixSigma’s latest survey on Six Sigma in the supply chain. 
This short survey will explore how Six Sigma and other process improvement methodologies, including supply chain models such as SCOR, are being used to optimize supply chain activities. It will also look at how companies involve their own suppliers in Six Sigma. 
To participate, click on the link below:http://www.isixsigma.com/supplychainsurvey 
All responses will remain absolutely anonymous and confidential. Your information will be reported only in an aggregate fashion so that no one will be able to link your response back to you. 
This survey will only be open for a short time. Please participate today. 
Thank you very much, Michael Marx Research Manager, iSixSigma Email: http://www.isixsigma.com/mm
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 21:18:52 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Black Belt Certification]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/black_belt_certification.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 18:22:15 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Call for Speakers: Energy Forum for Process Excellence in Houston, May 2009]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/call_for_speakers_energy_forum_for_process_excellence_in_houston_may_2009.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Over 200 energy industry professionals will gather in Houston, Texas, May 19-22 for iSixSigma Live's premiere Energy Forum for Process Excellence, supported by Chevron, Halliburton, Hess and Marathon Oil. Here's your chance to be one of the speakers.
Click here for the speaking proposal form:http://isixsigma.com/KQ5
We're especially looking for process improvement professionals who can share their own experiences, project case studies and lessons learned. Submit a speaking proposal that will cover one of the following subjects:• Oil &amp; Gas Upstream• Oil &amp; Gas Downstream• Power Generation• Power Distribution• Up &amp; Downstream Service Providers• Storage• Internal Operations (Supply Chain, HR, IT, etc.)• Business Process Management
Nominate yourself, a boss or a client. Again, here's the link to the speaking proposal form: http://isixsigma.com/KQ5(Deadline: February 6, 2009) ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:15:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Hmm... Which Deployment Model?]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/hmm_which_deployment_model.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I spent the Wednesday afternoon in the Deployment Models breakout session with Bob Crescenzi, from NewPage, Pam Cagle from Wal-Mart, and Stephen Turnipseed from Chevron.  
Each company is deploying Six Sigma with a different approach. Bob Crescenzi made a great point kicking off the discussions.  He said, “There is no vanilla deployment.” Top-down, middle-out, or grassroots, I think they all serve Rocky Road at some point! 
The most compelling story to me is that of Wal-mart.  Pam said they started in February 2007 with no money, no resources, and no curriculum.  They developed a training curriculum in-house, piloted it in Canada.  
“Our responsibility as LSS Leaders is to develop associates,” she said.  Although Lean Six Sigma is gaining traction at Wal-mart, it is still only used on the corporate level.  It hasn’t been introduced at the store level yet.  So don’t expect Six Sigma service from those associates just quite yet :)
The biggest takeaway here is that deployment models abound. There is no one, two or three ways to deploy Six Sigma. It’s been said time and time again that top-down deployments are most successful, but that just depends on what your definition of success is.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Got Courage?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/got_courage.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just got back from 2 awesome days at the 2009 iSixSigma "Back to Breakthrough" summit in Miami where I was surrounded by a gaziilion leaders and professionals who are passionate about excellence.   The summit was packed full of speakers, panels, and workshops all geared at helping companies get ’back to breakthrough’.  Thank you iSixSigma for leading the way.
Besides meeting some really cool people, the best thing for me was that that the experience helped me re-energize my personal commitment to excellence.   After all was said and done, I walked away with this . . . "Have the Courage to Lead".   Whether it’s a deployment, a business or a department, the one thing that each of us can personally contribute to achieving excellence in our company is to have the courage to lead.
The global economic situation has created a burning platform for all of us to reach beyond incremental improvement and focus on breakthrough.  Six Sigma provides a methodology to get you there.  The only question that remains is "Do you have the courage to lead?"  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:19:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: MANY THANKS]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/many_thanks.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was very honored to have been nominated for the iSixSigma MVP Award for "Best Blogger" - given the high quality of my fellow nominees, Robin Barnwell and Gianna Clark, I was not expecting to receive this recognition!  Attending the iSixSigma Live! conference was a blast, and I had a lot of fun and met a lot of great people (and learned a lot) in addition to the pleasure of receiving this reward.  The recognition items were great - the Cox Box mug from 10/15/07 and a mousepad with a quote from W. Edwards Deming:  "If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, then you don't know what you're doing."  Priceless.
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has posted blogs - I'm constantly learning from your contributions - and to those who have contributed to the blogs by posting responses.  Your willingness to put your thoughts "out there" helps to broaden the discussion and is valuable to all readers.
I was able to meet Michael Marx and Michael Cyger in person, and I'd like to thank them as well for their support and encouragement during my tenure as blogger here.  I related the following story to Michael Marx and he told me to write about it in my blog, so here it is!
When I was a Clinical Laboratory Manager at a former employer, in 2003, the organization decided to try something new to help improve its quality.  A notice was sent out to all leaders regarding the introduction of something called "Six Sigma" and the need for four new "Black Belts" to lead hospital-wide process improvement projects.  There wasn't any job description, yet, and no salary decisions had been made, and there was no career path developed.  Well, I decided that regardless of the lack of specifics, I was ready to try out for it.  I'd been doing change projects for a long time time in my career, and felt that I could step up to the next level.  But, I didn't know anything about Six Sigma - and what the heck was a Black Belt if not an expert in karate?
I wanted to appear knowledgeable in my interview, so I went to the public library and took out "Lean Six Sigma" by Michael George.  Then I went on-line and searched for "Six Sigma."  One of the first sites that came up was iSixSigma.com.  I found a lot of information there, and it became my best resource for information such as - 10 attributes of Black Belts, how come they're called Black Belts, what is Six Sigma, and so forth.  As a result, I went into the interview knowing a little more (dare I say it) than the interviewers, and in fact I was brave (or foolish) enough to tell the panel that I didn't think their case study merited a Six Sigma project, since the scope looked more appropriate for a WorkOut.  (Well, that gave them the idea that I wasn't afraid to take risks, anyway!)  In spite of this, they liked what they saw and when they asked me where I had learned about Six Sigma, I told them I'd done a lot of research on-line and my primary source was iSixSigma.com!  The rest, as they say, is history and I was on my way to being a Wave I Six Sigma Black Belt.
I never would have guessed that I would be a blogger for iSixSigma a few years after that.  My first blog was posted in April 2006 and I hope to continue for a long time to come!
Thanks again everyone for responding to my posts and for sharing your great ideas in this forum!
--Sue Kozlowski]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences&nbsp;,&nbsp;General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:04:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live! Opening Session Highlights]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_live_opening_session_highlights.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The iSixSigma Live! Miami Summit and Awards opened yesterday with a bang. Richard Willet, Jr., President and CEO of NewPage kicked off the morning session.   
Rick gave an enthusiastic overview of Lean Six Sigma at NewPage.  There was so much he spoke about, but one of the points really stuck me as unique.  He said that Green Belts are first asked to spend one week leaning out their own work process, freeing up 25 percent of their time.  They then use that new-found time to work on their Green Belt projects. 
I think we can all learn a lesson from that. If you feel you do not have enough time in the day to get your work done, consider investing time leaning out your own processes, an extra 2 hours a day can go a long way.  Use it wisely.  
Jason Tafler, CEO PointRoll spoke about how a creative company can utilize Six Sigma. Once again what struck me was his take on Lean.  After the initial Six Sigma deployment, PointRoll felt they needed more. So they deployed Lean and TPS. The Lean work caused an awakening at PointRoll. Growth is now scaled at the company through Lean efficiencies vs. hiring.  
Buzzwords from the morning…Lean, and economy.  More to come.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:00:27 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Best Places to Work Countdown]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/best_places_to_work_countdown.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well we did it.  We announced the order of the Top Ten iSixSigma Best Places to Work list this morning.  If you were following my tweets this morning you already heard where the No. 1 place is… if not, here we go…
#10 Rio Tinto Alcan
#9 Volt Information Sciences Inc.
#8 EMC Corp.
#7 Xerox Corp.
#6 NewPage Corp.
#5 Masco Builder Cabinet Group
#4 Chevron Corp.
#3 Textron Inc.
#2 Vought Aircraft Industries Inc.
#1 McKesson Corp.
What a cool cadre of companies we have here.  Congratulations to all.  For advice from each of the Best Places on what it takes to be great, see the latest iSixSigma.com article, Tips from iSixSigma's Best Places to Work.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:29:01 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma MVP Awards]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_mvp_awards.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I had the privilege of presenting the iSixSigma MVP Awards this morning to a fine group of Six Sigma professionals.  The MVP Awards are iSixSigma’s way of recognizing those people who volunteer their time and expertise making iSixSigma.com and the iSixSigma Blogosphere meaningful places to learn.  
Without purse or script, these knights and nobles selfishly give of themselves through open conversation, sharing their knowledge and passion for process improvement.  
And the winners are:
* Most Prolific Poster on iSixSigma Discussion Forums - Stan
* Most Useful/Helpful Poster on iSixSigma Discussion Forums - Mike Carnell, Owner CS International
Honorable Mention – Robert Butler
* Best Commenter on the iSixSigma BlogosphereMichael Cardus, Founder of Create-Learning-Team Building and TeamBuilding NY blogger
* Best iSixSigma BloggerSue Kozlowski, Manger Performance Improvement, Henry Ford Health System
Congratulations to the 2009 iSixSigma MVPs!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:36:32 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live! Awards Announced]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_live_awards_announced.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

The iSixSigma Live! Awards ceremony went off beautifully this morning. Congratulations to all the finalists, and woo hooo! to all the winners! 
Winners: Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Projects        * Environment - Bell Helicopter, Textron Inc. for “Compressed Air Savings Headstart (CASH)”    * Supply chain - General Dynamics for “Submarine Material Receipt Inspection”    * Transactional - North Shore-LIJ Health System for “Increasing CT capacity in a Tertiary Hospital”    * Manufacturing - Xerox Corp. for “Photoreceptor Belt Tensioning System”    * Customer service - Sutherland Global Services for “Improving Customer Satisfaction”    * Solving the unsolvable - Shuuro Technologies for “Improving Revenue from Sales”    * Innovation - Delphi Corp. for “Joint Design for Electronics Cooling Heat Exchangers”
Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up - NewPage Corp.
Most Successful Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program - United Services Automobile Association (USAA)
iSixSigma’s Six Sigma Hall of Fame 2009 Inductee – Bill Smith. Accepting the award on behalf of her father, Marjorie Hook. Marjorie paid a tender tribute to her father honoring him as a loving father, husband and neighbor. 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:38:26 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Hitting Target]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/hitting_target.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Targets appear in all shapes &amp; sizes. Sometimes seen as positive, “we operate a target-driven culture” and sometimes negative, “targets drive the wrong behaviour”. So what is true? Given the sheer diversity of targets, I want to focus on a specific area, daily work targets in a services environment. Let’s look at a scenario.
Imagine an operator works in a services business. Work comes in three types and timing tests show each type can be completed within 20 minutes in most cases. Now imagine the operator being given items of work and being asked to work under two different management controls:

Control 1, Work items are targetted to be completed within 22 minutes. 
Control 2, There are no targets and work items must be completed regardless of the time required
Statistically speaking, an assessment of the two approaches could be made, something like:

Ho = There is no difference between the time taken to complete work items under control 1 or control 2
I am looking at running some tests to see if there is a difference as this is related to a project I am working. But what is your gut feel on the expected performance difference?
I have tried this in a very small trial and found that when working under a time target, you focus on the time target. As the pressure builds on any individual work item because you are watching the clock you find it more difficult to focus on the task in hand and end up missing the target. You lose valuable time because of the target.
So what does this show? Does this describe an example of why targets drive the wrong behaviour? Does it show that getting it right first time saves money? Does this show operator’s pulling work? Does this show a difference between batch and continuous flow?
I’m not sure but I feel I am looking at something quite important here, just not sure exactly what it is yet……..]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:39:06 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Tweet, Tweet, Flying South for the Winter]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/tweet_tweet_flying_south_for_the_winter.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It’s a busy week for us here at iSixSigma.  The final day leading to the iSixSigma Live! Summit &amp; Awards in Miami... 
If you tweet you’re in for a treat. I’ll be tweeting live from Miami. Follow the iSixSigma tweet for mini updates on what I’m up to at the conference. Be the first to read the winners of the iSixSigma MVP awards... as well as everything else under the sunny skies of Miami.
You can also follow here on the blogs, by reading my tweet feed below or just look in the left sidebar up top for the latest. 
Tweet Tweet.


       
For Non Flash Users
iSixSigma Live! Twitter Updates

 follow me on Twitter
 



]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:08:41 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Tip-Top Tip]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/tip_top_tip.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Happy New Year! Today, rather than talk about something deeply insightful I thought I would share one of the tools I like to use. 
Ever had to arrange a project meeting? Did you need to get say 10 people’s diaries aligned, usually at short notice? Was it fun?
There are many ways to approach this simple but sometimes frustrating task. 

You could swap lots of e-mail with everyone till you get agreement 
You could force the date &amp; location and that’s it 
You could ask someone else to do it for you 
You could forward plan and have a meeting schedule defined well in advance 
Your calendar software might even find the best date for you
Here is one way I find useful. There are a number of free on-line survey site on the internet. I take a couple minutes to set-up a survey and send it out as shown below.

Then sit back and wait for the responses.

Very useful tool.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:54:48 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Don't Look Now - Here Comes the Wave]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/dont_look_now_here_comes_the_wave.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[While scanning news for lean and six sigma related articles this morning, I came across this gem: "Six Sigma Certification Booms as Employment Busts" - it was actually a press release posing as news over on msnbc.com. That's fine - I recall from my days in media relations that many news outlets craved pre-written content, especially now with the thinning of news gathering organizations.
Over the last few years, the business of Lean Six Sigma certification has bloomed trememdously - a phenomenon that has been discussed at length over on the forums. The consensus there seems to be that such cert programs in and of themselves are fine - I myself have gone through one such program, and had a fine experience with it. For some, online learning works as well, if not better, than classroom training. Different people learn differently. I've also had the opportunity to go through classroom training given at one of the most famous companies ever to use Six Sigma. Again, a fine experience.
So what's the harm in presenting Lean Six Sigma certification programs as a way for currently unemployed workers to get a leg up in a tough job market? Or any job market for that matter?
As most (if not all) experienced practitioners of Lean and Six Sigma have learned, there is a huge difference between learning the tools and concepts of Lean and Six Sigma and actually applying them in a real business setting, with real people, real (usually messy) data, solving real business problems. In my own experience, running a correct MSA, ANOVA or DOE is far less challenging than working through the politics and organizational challenges to create sustained improvements. And this is not something that one can really learn in the classroom or through an online course. It has to be experienced first hand. In this way, our field is no different than any other. The theory is important to know, but in the end, it's the practical outcome that matters most.
Worse yet, the change management approaches used in one company culture may not work in another, or even different cultures within a company. It's a process of continuous learning, re-learning, and adjustment to bring about the desired business impacts. 
The certification question is not an issue unique to our field. Professional certification programs are widely available - the real question is, does the certificate provide the leg up during job searches? I would be very interested in seeing data on that question.
The bottom line: Is getting certified in Lean, Six Sigma, or anything else one of those critical X's for the millions of unemployed right now? Please post your thoughts in the comments section.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:40:40 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: My Nebula]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/my_nebula.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 10:17:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: New Year's Resolution]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/new_years_resolution.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This year, I'm making a resolution to do a good deed daily.  This is inspired in part by Gianna Clark's latest blog, How W.O.W.?, but also by my own sense of imbalance in the customer feedback that most organizations receive.
I've communicated about problems and complaints many times - but - I realized that I don't give positive feedback very often.  (And don't we Process Improvers always say, that we receive more negative feedback than positive?  It's embarrassing to realize that I'm not walking the talk!)  So this year I'm trying to look for daily opportunities to give kudos and complements - not only for the WOW moments but when people show special care and attentiveness.
Like Gianna, my husband and I had the occasion to process a transaction at our local bank the other day.  We stopped in to cash out a CD (boy, just when you think your child's college expenses are all set, there's always another special need!!).  Anyway, the young man who helped us a) checked our interest amount for our savings account and increased it, based on our average balance over the past few months; b) suggested a better way to transfer funds to avoid fees and delays; c) talked with us about special offers and opportunities related to our credit and debit cards, and didn't pressure us when we declined.  
We didn't have a bell to ring, like GIanna did, but we asked to speak to his manager, and then asked her to put a note in his file for excellent customer service.  They were both surprised and pleased (expecting the negative) and we felt that we had done a good deed.
This is one resolution that will be fun to keep up!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:59:22 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: How W.O.W.?    Ask Now.]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/how_wow_ask_now.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So you’ve decided that you are ready to embark on the journey to the W.O.W. Side.  Now what?  What does it look like - feel like?  Who’s got the directions?  And how do you know when you’ve arrived?   Simple . . .  Just Ask.
If you are providing your Customers with a W.O.W. experience, you will know it.  If you are not, you will know it as well.  Defining What’s needed, On time, With value goes beyond having great customer service.  It is using customer input to help you design and define products, services and channels to deliver them in a way that creates customer delight.  
Being right on the heels of the shopping season for many across the globe, now is a perfect time to ask customers about W.O.W.    Most have spent the last month either shopping in stores or on-line and many have already experienced the joy of returning or exchanging items.  Both of these transactions, either buying or returning are opportunities to W.O.W. your customer.  How do you know if you passed the W.O.W. test?   Ask them.  It is the most direct form of customer feedback that you can get.
Customer feedback, of all types, is the backbone of W.O.W.   It comes in many forms.  Market research is a form of feedback that helps define what customers want.  Analyzing buying patterns and market data and developing surveys that ask questions related to your product or service is key.  Once a product or service is developed or provided, again asking customers what they think is important.  And, when your customers have a question or problem that needs to be resolved, asking them if you are providing a delightful experience is again an opportunity to learn more.   Surveys, whether on the spot, or after a time-lapse can capture valuable insights as to how customers feel about the service or product and are a true gage of W.O.W.    
Here’s an example of how immediate feedback works.  Yesterday I had a lengthy transaction at a bank and next to each teller was a sign that said, "Ring the bell if you got exceptional service."  I was in the bank for at least twenty minutes and never heard the bell ring.  I was wondering if my teller was going to W.O.W. me and yes she did.  Awesome service.   I finished my transaction in the back and as I walked out went past her workspace, said thank you and rang the bell.  Everyone looked up and across the counter I saw a big smile.  It made me feel good - looks like my W.O.W. experience turned into hers.  (Double W.O.W)
I can’t leave the customer feedback discussion without touching on customer complaints.  Customer complaints provide valuable input as well.   Reviewing, categorizing and analyzing complaints to identify trends and any recurring issues is a great way to capture customer feedback (even if it is not the preferred method.)    All of this analysis begs for application of Six Sigma tools.
So you have feedback, analysis and some possible recommendations.  What next?   Translating this feedback into a business plan is the next step.  Without this, all you have is feedback.  This is the tough part but operationalizing customer feedback and using it to drive your Business Plan is not an option - it’s a requirement.  Linking your business plan to process improvements closes the loop (sounds like Hoshin to me). And after improvements are implemented, it is time to ask the customer for feedback to see if your improvements made a difference.  
As you can see,  the whole process of W.O.W. starts with the customer and ends with the customer.  And throughout the journey Six Sigma serves as an integral part of how to make it so.  Join me next time as we explore some of these Six Sigma linkages or better yet, join me at iSixSigma Live in January where I’ll be sharing some insights in person on how to Take a Walk on the W.O.W. SideTM  
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 02:25:49 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: When is Lean... Not Lean?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/when_is_lean_not_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have been thinking a lot lately about how the Toyota Production System was developed.  Unlike those of us who have books, websites, and training programs in abundance, Toyota engineers took their process of assembly-line manufacture of automobiles and created, in incremental steps, the methodology that's now known as Lean.  It took shape over a long period, as different contributors added their ideas to create a strong "House of Quality" for the Toyota Motor Company.
But - what if these bright people had not come from automotive manufacturing?  What if they had come from (for example) healthcare?
I know that this is akin to imagining what the earth would be like today if there were no moon.  (Just think - no tides.  Different air and water currents.  Little shore erosion - no sand?  Hard to imagine!)

What if their initial process studies were not based on repetitive motions that could be adapted to robotic or at least automated mechanisms?
What if their major source of variation was not the mechanical devices, but the people who provided the process?
What if their processes were not amenable to on-the-job training, but required differentiation of skill and ability at the level of advanced education and training?
What if their product was not someone who "ordered" a tangible object, but someone who showed up unannounced with a mysterious problem that couldn't be solved by just looking at it?
It made me think that if those bright young engineers had worked in healthcare, that what we now call Lean would be vastly different than what was developed by Toyota.
And, as a related thought, it made me wonder what we are doing by applying lean manufacturing principles to healthcare.
Now, I'm not the healthcare equivalent to Eiji Toyoda.  Or Shigeo Shingo.  Or Genichi Taguchi.  Or any of the other brilliant minds that helped to develop the Toyota Production System.
But, am I doing a disservice to my providers and customers, when I try to fit lean manufacturing methods to a highly technically-skilled service environment?
I've heard over and over again that lean can be adapted to any process, anywhere, in any industry or branch of service.  I've done many lean projects myself, and seen the very tangible benefits that value-stream thinking and creation of flow can produce, along with level loading and consideration of takt time.
But are we only seeing the tip of the iceberg?  What further benefits might we see if we developed a "service system" that used tools uniquely intended for service processes, rather than adapting manufacturing tools as best we can?
Just asking!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:27:41 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: What You Measure is What You Get?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/what_you_measure_is_what_you_get.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA["Perhaps what you measure is what you get. More likely, what you measure is all you'll get. What you don't (or can't) measure is lost" - H. Thomas Johnson
Those of you who are Deming fans may liken this quote to Deming's admonition that "the most important figures that one needs for management are unknown or unknowable, but successful management must nevertheless take account of them." (from Out of the Crisis, p121). 
I came across this quote recently, which was quite apt as I was completing the end of year wrap-up required  of all employees at my firm. Like many firms that run on making the metrics, making them look good, having airtight explanations for variances, plans to move the needle, and so on, the powerpoint decks generally tell a tremendous story. (If only Wall St. could see them - perhaps stock prices would be better?). 
Conversely, if you don't have numbers to back up your story, come back and talk to me when you do. 
So back to my year end wrap-up, which, by the way, is a key component of performance evaluation, merit increases, and future career path within the firm. I was advised to include as many "quantifiable accomplishments" as possible. Having joined the firm only mid-year, and assigned to work on a quality issue that has plagued the industry for 10 or 20 years, it is probably too soon to declare victory and post a dramatic improvement to the things our customers care about most. 
In fact, the bulk of my time has been spent trying to develop facts and data about the process performance, and impress upon the producing organizations the voice of the internal and external customers, so that we can focus our measurements and improvement efforts on the right things. Very basic questions - who are the customers? What do they need? How well are we meeting those needs?, basic questions that we are still trying to answer. All the while, the quality of this particular product hasn't changed at all since I launched the effort several months ago. 
Our team has also been highly aware of the dark side of metrics - to Dr. Johnson's point, what you measure may be all you get. And to quote another favorite thinker of mine, The Lean Thinker, "you get what you measure, but don't be surprised of people are ingenious in destructive ways in how they get there" (full post here.) So we strive for 100% on-time performance, only to see our first time yields plummet. Or we strive to measure revisions, only to have needed corrections go un-made in order to show a reduction. As one of my colleagues put it, "tell me what number you want to move, and we'll make sure that we do". 
Now, this is not a plea to remove metrics. Only to measure the right things, and measure them correctly, so that we account for the "dark side". So, present on-time performance figures, if that's what's important, but make sure the FTY % is always presented next to it. It's also a plea to keep taking account of the unknown or unmeasurable things that matter - just because we can't measure it, doesn't mean we get to ignore it.
Last week, a senior leader and sponsor of this effort jokingly asked whether I had the problem figured out. Not quite. But I was able to tell him that department X has several talented black belts on it, is now focused on measuring defects the right way, and is starting to really understand the needs of their internal and external customers. To which he replied, "That's a major accomplishment!".
I asked if I could quote him in my wrap-up - it's probably the best piece of data I have going for me thus far.
Whatever holiday you and yours celebrate, I hope it is a good one. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:02:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Anderson's FMEA]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/andersons_fmea.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 08:03:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Christmas Challenge]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/christmas_challenge.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is just for fun and to win a real prize you need to have been very good all year and have a generous expense account.
Good old Santa wants to give you a Christmas present. He’s checked if you have been naughty or nice and the news is not good, so you have to pick the right present. One of the presents holds the all expenses-paid trip to iSixSigma Live (Miami - January 13-16) the other two presents hold copies of that classic text Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors.

But Santa is a kind fellow and knowing you are a statistician decides to give you a choice. He asks which present you have picked, maybe it was B. He looks thoughtfully and tells you the prize is definitely not present A, would you like to change your mind? What will you do? Click the link to see how you do.

No thanks Santa, I’ll stick with what I picked
Thank you Santa, I’ll change my mind
Interested in the stats? Take a look at this: Monty Hall.
Wishing you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:49:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: A Lean Carol]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/a_lean_carol.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Well, it's time for my annual Christmas Blog!  With apologies to Charles Dickens, here is my adapted version of his "Ghost Story of Christmas" (first published in 1843).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Stave 1:  Muda's Ghost
The workers at the Shusendo &amp; Muda Company are very busy being highly productive.  The boss, Ebenezer Shusendo, only gives performance bonuses based on individual productivity so everyone works as hard as they can regardless of what the customers want.  Shusendo's nephew, Eiji, stops by to wish him a "Lean Christmas!" but Shusendo dismisses him with "Bah, Humbug!"  The clerk, Taiichi, knows there is a better way to approach things and vows to "keep Lean in my heart, all the year long!"  After intense negotiating, Taiichi is allowed to take Christmas day off, which confirms Shusendo's opinion that his employees just don't work hard enough.
When Shusendo returns home, he starts to see all kinds of apparitions - movement of product in a continuous flow, loud ringing of andon signals, and pictures in his rooms turning into Value Stream Maps.  The ghost of Muda visits him, and warns that if he doesn't mend his ways, his company will continue to show decreasing profits.  All of his workers will leave and his company will fold.  He will walk the earth in misery, bearing the burden of waste that he could have eliminated in his processes.  His only chance of redemption is to listen to three spirits who will visit him that night.
Stave 2:  The First of the Three Spirits
The Ghost of Lean Past, Henry Ford, visits Shusendo and takes him on a journey to his childhood.  Shusendo is shown a happy party given by his first employer, who shared profits with his workers.  He is reminded of his first love, Puriti, and how she left him because he was too busy doing rework at his company.  They visit Frederick Winslow Taylor and see him writing "The Principles of Scientific Management;" and they take a tour of the Rouge plant in its heyday in Dearborn Michigan.  Finally, they end up at the Toyota Automatic Loom Works.  Furious at being shown the opportunities that were missed to make a huge improvement in his own company, Shusendo gets angry at the spirit only to find that he has been returned to his own bed.
Stave 3:  The Second of the Three Spirits
The Ghost of Lean Present, Genichi Taguchi, shows Shusendo busy factories and organizations in the modern day.  Many companies are incorporating lean principles into their operations, and sharing the least-waste way.  They value their employees as creators of value for their customers, and try to make sure that there is flow in each step.  Shusendo sees the huge impact that pull systems have, and becomes interested in lean concepts.  They watch his clerk Taiichi (who tries to use Lean tools when his boss isn't watching) at Christmas dinner with his family, including Tiny Toyoda, who has carpal-tunnel syndrome from unnecessary processing.  Even though many people are trying to become lean, the Ghost shows Shusendo two pitiful workers huddled under his robes who personify the major causes of poor production, Mura (unevenness) and Muri (unnecessary work).  As the bell strikes twelve midnight, the Ghost vanishes.
Stave 4:  The Last of the Three Spirits
The Ghost of Lean Yet to Come arrives as a shadowy figure, robed in black, who points grimly at all of the waste present in production processes all over the world.  The Ghost shows Shusendo's clerk Taiichi mourning the loss of his son, Tiny Toyoda.  Even worse is the scene of the Global Takeover Company in the process of purchasing what's left of Shusendo &amp; Muda, only to liquidate it for a quick profit.  In great fear over this possible future, Shusendo begs the Ghost to send him back so he can change everything for the better.  Weeping, he wakes to find that it is Christmas morning and he has been allowed to return to his former life.
Stave 5:  The End of It
Shusendo is overjoyed to mend his ways.  He sends his clerk Taiichi a roast goose "just in time" for Christmas dinner, and promises to implement Lean in his company.  He surprises everyone with his new-found respect for people, and reduces overprocessing so Tiny Toyoda doesn't need to wear his wrist braces any more.  He earns a reputation for incorporating the spirit and principles of lean, in addition to utilizing lean tools and concepts.  He even changes his name to Sensei Soushou.  
To quote from the end of the story:  "He had no further dealings with the Spirits, but lived upon the Lean Principle, ever afterwards, and it was always said of him, that he knew how to eliminate waste, if anyone alive possessed the knowledge.  May that truly be said of us, and all of us!  And so, as Tiny Toyoda observed, Learn To See, Every One!"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Happy holidays to all!
 
 
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:27:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Buying a Motorcycle]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/buying_a_motorcycle.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 06:39:20 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Christmas Lights - A Lean Challenge]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/christmas_lights_a_lean_challenge.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I got this from a friend and decided to share it with my friends at Six Sigma.  I thought this might represent the process many use when they don’t plan.  Just get the job done. Don’t worry about process or structure or planning.  Just do it. Hm.... You think a value stream map would help?
My wife has been on my case to get the lights up and I did it. Now I can’t figure out why she isn’t talking to me!
 
  
Happy Holidays
Stephen]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 07 Dec 2008 13:06:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma on a Roll]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_on_a_roll.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Last year iSixSigma Magazine ran a cover story on PointRoll and the beginnings of their Six Sigma initiative.  PointRoll, a leading online ad agency, is a small company by Fortune 500 revenue standards (less than 100 million in revenue) and even smaller Six Sigma company by Six Sigma standards (1 Black Belt and 7 Green Belts when they started).  
To some, such a small deployment may not make much sense, but to PointRoll, this little initiative makes dollars and cents in one hand and happy customers in the other.  
This year iSixSigma Magazine followed up with PointRoll both in the May/June and November/December issues to see where they had gone with Six Sigma. 
PointRoll focused their first projects in production engineering and creative services. Now with almost two years of project work under their belts, they continue to find more ways to improve the business.  In 2008 they introduced Lean and have trained 42 people in Lean principles.  Their deployment has now grown to 1 MBB, 3 BBs, 4 GBs and 2 Lean Belts and they have started a DMADV project as well.
PointRoll’s Chief Executive Officer, Jason Tafler, will be a keynote speaker at the iSixSigma Live! Miami conference in January.  A "must see" for small companies just starting out on the Six Sigma journey. He’ll give insights on how his company has built a solid Six Sigma culture amidst a cool atmosphere of creativity and innovation.  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:25:22 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Least-Effort Way]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_least_effort_way.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We've all seen the "resistance curve" where a few people are innovators, some are early adopters, early and late majorities, and a few are laggards, or skeptics, or what-have-you (from the work of Everett Rogers and other researchers). 
One way to get almost everyone to be an early adopter is to offer something of value - money, time off, presents.  Yes, bribes (as well as food) are well-known tools for speeding change acceptance.  Did you ever hear of anyone resisting a bonus check?  (I do know of one instance where a person received an unexpected bonus check for $100, then complained because the check wasn't for an amount that would have yielded $100 after taxes.)
However, there's another inducement to change that I've observed.  When people are introduced to the possibility of a new or different process, they sometimes are eager to embrace change as long as the new process meets one criterion:  It's "less work" for them.
Now, this is a little different discussion than most of us have had about Radio Station WII-FM:  What's In It For Me?  These particular folks don't want to be jollied into accepting more work; they just want to do less work (by their own definition).
Because, let's face it - often, it's "more work" to do something right the first time, in the way it's supposed to be done, than to do it poorly the first time and let someone else do the rework later.  Regardless of the potential benefit and value to the customer, some people who are "in the moment" just care about the work that they do personally.  It's so easy to get caught up in what's value-added for ourselves and to lose track of what's value added for the customer.
I don't want to get diverted into related discussions about the work ethic of our Generation-X and Gen-Y employees (not to mention the Millennials); or Theory X (people try to do the least work) vs Theory Y (people try to do a good job).  I'd just like to know whether anyone else has experienced this, and what they have done to address it.  After all, we won't get far with process improvement if the gold standard is that everyone will do less work than they were doing before!
Or will we?!?!?!?!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:22:58 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Turns a New Page]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_turns_a_new_page.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[NewPage Corp. is the cover story in the November/December 2008 issue of iSixSigma Magazine. 


"From its inception three years ago, NewPage planned to make Lean Six Sigma an integral part of how the company was run. The paper producer is using the methodology to connect its amalgam of mills in a common culture and to differentiate from the competition at a time of decreased demand in the paper industry. NewPage has tailored its deployment to best meet those needs."
A couple of those tailor-made aspects of the NewPage deployment:
1) RLSS (Rapid Lean Six Sigma) – 60 day process that engages all employees in DMAIC not just the Belts.
2) Green Belt Pairing – Green Belts are paired up through training and projects. Each leading one project and supporting the other in one project.
3) Additional Belt designations- Yellow Belts and Brown Belts: Yellow Belts receive Six Sigma overview training. Brown Belts are technical experts certified as Black Belts but left in their previous roles.
If you want to learn more about the NewPage Lean Six Sigma deployment, come see Richard D. Willett Jr., NewPage President and Chief Operating Officer deliver a keynote address at the iSixSigma Live! Miami conference in January.  
NewPage Links
Papermaker Makes Lean Six Sigma Work, ControlGlobal.com, 2008
NewPage Honored As One Of “America’s Most Admired” In Its Industry by Fortune Magazine
Lean Six Sigma at NewPage
 
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Forest &amp; Paper Products]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 10:45:52 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Act II]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/act_ii.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Six Sigma, which is beginning to acquire some grey around the temples, has now advanced to the stage where the basic requirements for success of the program are fairly well known. That doesn’t stop it from being screwed up in about 95% of installations, but no one can say that’s due to a lack of reference material detailing what’s required to be successful. Implementing Six Sigma has become a matter of excellent execution rather than invention and discovery. Or at least it should be.
The same is true of many other large-scale organization programs and installations. Converting to Oracle or SAP, for example. Building a performance management system. Opening and managing a call center. Developing a strong Innovation or New Product Development process. Outsourcing. The list goes on and on. There are a lot of things under the general “organizational transformation” umbrella that while still very difficult to pull off, require excellent large-scale execution skills rather than a lot of invention.
All of this leads to what I call the “Act II” problem. As you might guess, Act II follows Act I. Act I can be any of the things I described above, including starting a Six Sigma program. It can also be fixing or “re-energizing” previously botched execution, which is actually more common with Six Sigma programs these days. Whatever the case, the defining feature of Act I is that is it usually so pressing and painful that no one is thinking ahead to Act II, especially the person who was hired to produce Act I.
So what is Act II? Simply put, it is making use of what was produced in Act I to achieve some desired end. Wait, you might say, isn’t that the point of Act I? Generally speaking, not really.
Take a Six Sigma deployment, for example. Act I usually consists of hiring or training belts, engaging consultants, conducting training classes, filling a project pipeline, getting initial projects done, delivering results, etc. Many (most?) organizations fail at some point in Act I, which is why Act II doesn’t get much mainstream attention. Act II can only begin when Act I is complete – that is, when the program is already up and running and hitting on all cylinders. The project and talent pipeline is flowing well with little intervention, and results are being regularly delivered. Six Sigma isn’t new or exciting anymore, it just a part of the fabric of the business. Though rare enough, all of that just gets you to the starting line of Act II.
Act II is where you start to think beyond the simple running of the program. Now that you have all the machinery, what are you going to do with it? How does it play with the other processes in your business? How will what you have built evolve over time? If you’ve mastered the basics, what do the advanced levels look like? How can what you’ve got become a competitive advantage in the marketplace? What should be emphasized and what should be dropped in the future? In short, what will you do with what you have built? Act II is all about answering these questions, but only after the initial execution has been completed at a high level. Only after the initial build is done.
The problem is that Act II takes a much different skill set than Act I, so it is rare to find one person who can do both effectively. And many people who have built careers on Act I – particularly those who are called in to fix an ailing Act I – simply have no Act II. When the time comes, they let the results of their excellent execution operate on a performance plateau. They, and the organization, will often feel they’ve earned the right to do so. But unfortunately, in the world of organizational change, standing still means moving backward. If you’re not growing, leaping, expanding, and evolving with whatever you are doing, then you’re marching to the grave. There really is no in between, no time to enjoy the plateau. If you have no Act II waiting to begin, you might as well not even have done Act I. That’s a tough lesson to learn, but non the less true for it.
I think this explains why the business landscape is littered with the carcasses of many once-strong programs. They had a strong Act I, but there was no Act II, so the show ended abruptly. As hard as Act I is, and as rare as it is to see an Act I successfully conclude, Act II is even trickier to plan for and pull off, and consequently more rare and valuable.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live Summit '09 Update - Reception &amp; Keynote]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_live_summit_09_update_reception_amp_keynote.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[iSixSigma Live Summit '09 Update - Reception &amp; KeynoteTrump International Beach ResortMiami, Florida
5:30-7:30 P.M., Tuesday, January 13, 2009Six Sigma Wine Tasting and Welcome ReceptionHosted by Six Sigma WineryOpen to All Summit Attendees
11:30 A.M., Wednesday, January 14, 2009Mr. Kaj AhlmannKeynote: "Six Sigma and Wine: Art or Science?"Founder, Six Sigma Ranch, Vineyards and WineryFormer Chairman, President and CEO, GE Capital Employers Reinsurance Corporation
iSixSigma Live! is pleased to announce that Kaj Ahlmann will be giving a keynote address at the upcoming iSixSigma Live! Summit '09 in Miami, Florida. In addition, Mr. Ahlmann's winery - Six Sigma Ranch, Vineyards and Winery - will be hosting the welcome reception on Tuesday, January 13.
Kaj's professional life led to a career in reinsurance, most notably as Chairman and CEO of Employer's Reinsurance Corporation and a member of the Board of Directors for GE's Capital Services. The management practice of Six Sigma became the standard by which Kaj ensured a consistently high quality both in his corporate life and in his transition to grape growing and winemaking.
In 1999, Kaj and his wife, Else, purchased 4,300 acres in Lake County, California, where they work to create a sustainable ranch with vineyards nestled into nature. In 2005, Kaj constructed Six Sigma Winery on the ranch, including a barrel cave and state of the art winery equipment.
For complete conference information visit the iSixSigma Live! web site by going to:http://www.isixsigmalive.com]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:25:10 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: And the Award Goes to...]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/and_the_award_goes_to.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ 
iSixSigma Live! has announced the finalists for the awards that will be given at the Miami Summit in January.  
The top three finalists for the award, Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up Program, are: Betfair, NewPage Corp., and Unlimited Technology Inc.
Finalists for the award, Most Successful Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program, are: United Services Automobile Association (USAA), US Army TACOM LCMC, and Washington Mutual/JPMorgan Chase.
For the Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Project awards, there are 21 finalists in 7 categories. For all the details read the full press release. 
Congrats to all the finalists!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 10:15:59 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Thriving on Chaos]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/thriving_on_chaos.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I used to work in the IT business and we were always on the look-out for the next “big thing” to cash in on. It was things like moving from mainframes to open systems and onto Microsoft Windows, relational databases, business intelligence systems, OLAP reporting and CRM systems. 
So while I was travelling home from Sydney (around 1995) after a weeks consulting, I read about the next big thing, it was called the World Wide Web. This was going to be big, bigger than big. People working in IT should get ready to cash in on this next big growth market. Turns out to have been more than right, but the article didn’t go BIG enough!
And how the world has changed. In the olden days (pre-WWW) my options to get information were limited. Today I can access just about anything directly on my computer. Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but working in such an information rich environment does have its challenges.
I sometimes feel a bit overwhelmed by the sheer number of options, methods and approaches I can choose from. There does not seem be a part of human existence that someone hasn’t studied, developed a methodology and written a best selling book. I struggle to know which to believe or which to follow. Every year there are new crops of ways to solving problems, things like Blue Ocean/Red Ocean and Good to Great. So I have come-up with a way to deal with information over-load
I recently went into a second-hand book-shop and couldn’t believe my luck. I managed to buy a first-edition copy of the Tom Peter’s classic Thriving on Chaos for only £1. I don’t think the copy I bought had ever been opened let alone read! What Tom offers is a series of about 40 lessons in management &amp; leadership. 
So here is what I do. Along comes the next radical break-through innovation that will completely change the world, just like the World Wide Web. I thumb through Thriving on Chaos to see how it was done back in 1987. It’s my baseline.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Book Review&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 06:32:55 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean Six Sigma Consultants]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_six_sigma_consultants.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store for 2009 Calendars and Mugs

The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 08:42:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean Travel (or not!)]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_travel_or_not.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've spent a good part of this past summer travelling for business.  In the past, I might have flown a few times a year for conferences, but this year I've earned quite a few "miles,"  Now, I know that some of you are already experienced Road Warriors, and you are probably already laughing at me, but I'd like to share some "learnings" from my lean perspective!
Who's the customer of an airport?  Not, it would seem, the fliers.  Yes, we spend the money for the ticket.  And what's value-added for us?  Getting on the plane in time for departure - comfortable flight - arriving on time, at the right airport, safely - retrieving baggage easily - obtaining transportation to the next destination,  Did I capture that value stream?
So let's take a look at the process of just getting on the plane.  In order to get on the plane in time for departure, we:
1.  Start boarding 1/2 hour before the flight.  In order to do that, we
2.  Arrive at the boarding area at least 1/2 hour before the flight.  In order to do that, we
3.  Arrive at the screening check gate at least 1/2 hour before that time, guessing how long the lines will be in the waiting lanes.  In order to do that, we
4.  Arrive in the terminal at least 1/2 hour before that time, guessing how long the lines will be in the check-in waiting lanes.  In order to do that, we
5.  Arrive in the parking deck/lot at least 1/2 hour before that time, guessing how full the deck will be and how long it will take to find a parking space, then walk or take the bus to the terminal.  In order to do that, we
6.  Leave our home or office (depending on the distance, of course) with at least an extra half-hour to spare, guessing how many construction or traffic delays will be encountered along the way to the airport.  
That's a lot of non-value-added time!  Now, of course the process has many "short cuts" for those willing to pay for, or arrange for, the extra "priviledge" of a lean experience!
6.  Could use a taxi or limousine service to the airport.
5.  Could park at one of those park-n-go places near the airport, and take the shuttle to the terminal.
4.  Could check-in on-line, to get the boarding pass printed out, and use curb-side check-in for baggage if available.
3.  Buy first-class ticket to go through the security check-points using the "first class" lanes, if available.
2.  Ditto, to board the plane first (extra benefit, have a drink &amp; sit in a comfy seat while watching everyone else file past for half an hour). 
1.  Or, take a chance and try to minimize waiting by arriving just as the boarding ends (might have to accept a certain risk of failure with this strategy, though!).
So how could the airlines/airports make the travel value stream a little less non-value-added?  Doesn't it seem as though the air travel experience could be made a little more lean for those of us who buy airplane tickets?  I'd love to hear from you frequent fliers who've had time to think about this during all those hours of waiting in line! 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 07:09:23 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Customer W.O.W. - The Basics]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/customer_wow_the_basics.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What’s Needed . . . On Time . . . With Value . . .   That’s what you’ll find on the W.O.W. Side.  More simply put, it is about customer delight.   I like the words "customer delight".  Webster’s defines delight as ’extreme satisfaction’ . . .  It is what gets your customers to say WOW!   Professor Noriaki Kano described the look and feel of WOW with the Kano Model.  It’s going past satisfying customer basic needs and performance needs and finding those things that excite or delight the customer thus creating customer WOW.    Sounds simple but you will find that many companies, although striving for WOW, have not figured out how to consistently meet basic needs and therefore wallow in the halls of "can’t get there from here".   Basic needs are those things that if done correctly do not add to customer satisfaction but if done incorrectly will result in dissatisfaction.  For example, if you are checking out of a hotel and your bill is correct it’s a non-event.  No one is running around saying WOW, they got my bill right.  But having an error on the bill results in customer dissatisfaction.  
The first step in mapping your path to the W.O.W. Side is getting the basics right.  Sounds simple but it is not.  How many times in the past month have you experienced poor service or poor quality?  Maybe it was getting home and finding out that the drive-through restaurant left a sandwich out of your order or maybe you had to stand in line for 15 minutes to get through a checkout line.  The fact that basic needs are constantly changing makes this step even more complicated.  What was a delighter last week will, over time, work its way to a basic need.  For example, years ago having internet service in a hotel was a delighter.  Today, if a hotel doesn’t provide free wireless service they are teetering on the edge of creating customer dissatisfaction.  Customer basic needs and expectations are changing so fast that in the blink of an eye you can find yourself quickly moving from Customer WOW to  Customer OW proving once more that meeting basic needs is an ongoing journey -  not a one time accomplishment.
So where do you start?  Get the basics right.  Define your core business and products, review metrics that describe your performance level, identify any defects that keep you from getting the basics right and apply continuous improvement methods such as lean, six sigma, kaizen, etc. to eliminate dissatisfiers.  You will also need to constantly draw on customer input to gage your success and keep your ’basics’ up-to-date.  
Getting the basics right is a prerequisite to being able to "Take a Walk on the W.O.W. Side".  Bypass this step and you may find that the old saying "You can’t get there from here" may be old but still stands true.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 04:56:49 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Sticky Solutions]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/sticky_solutions.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You invest 4 months of your life. You work in close co-operation with the operational teams. You gain buy-in and agreement on an innovative solution to enhance business performance. You build sustainability into the solution. You identify clear benefits in terms of financial, process, people and customer. It’s a text-book project. 
So return in 6 months time and what do you find? Rip-roaring success? No it’s been forgotten, the benefits were never banked and the pilot performance improvement was just a blip. Everything is back to “normal”.
It was a simple solution. Implement a feedback-loop to support continual learning. 
When information is passed from team A to team B, team B return feedback to team A on the accuracy of the information supplied. Team A review this feedback and continually improve their process. Everyone wins……..or do they. Team A had more work to do in learning from the feedback and decided not to learn. 
What can I learn from this? Thoughts go off in all directions on why there was the resistance to change. Maybe it was the feeling that they were being “done to”? Maybe it was because they weren’t being incentivised on achieving the improvement? Maybe it was because there is so much change in progress that this got lost in the fog? Maybe more people should have been hired to allow the change to happen? Maybe, maybe, maybe.
Tips please on how to make solutions stick.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 06:22:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Job Description]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/job_description.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Visit the Cox-Box Store!  
Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Best Places Finalists]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/best_places_finalists.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
 
The Best Places to Work Competition has wrapped up and the top ten finalists have emerged.  Now we’re not going to tell you where the No. 1 place for Six Sigma professionals to work is yet…or what the order of the top ten is…. We’re saving that for the awards ceremony in January. 
But we will tell you in alphabetical order who the top ten finalists are:
ChevronEMCMasco Builder Cabinet GroupMcKessonNewPageRio Tinto AlcanTextronVolt Information SciencesVought Aircraft IndustriesXerox Corporation
We had over 50 nominations for companies all over the world.  Sixteen companies met all the entry requirements and completed a two part online survey. The senior Six Sigma leader submitted answers to an employer survey while full time Six Sigma personnel (BBs, MBBs and Deployment Leaders) at each company submitted answers to an employee survey.  
Companies were ranked by totaling the scores from the two surveys; the most weight was given to the employee survey.  The employee survey was also weighted giving the most weight to the job satisfaction category.  
Congratulations to these companies as well as all the companies who were nominated. The number one place will be announced at the iSixSigma Live! Awards breakfast in Miami in January. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 21:21:18 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Let's Do an FMEA]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lets_do_an_fmea.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  
Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 07:58:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Bragging Rights]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/bragging_rights.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Winning isn’t everything; in fact, many times a “win” is in finishing the race or improving the score, whether that means fewer defects, decreased cycle time and/or improved customer satisfaction. But there are times when a win is a win and calls for more attention than is usually given to the everyday job well done. Such an instance recently happened.
iSixSigma Magazine was honored by the American Society of Business Publication Editors (ASBPE) in its 30th Annual Awards of Excellence. The magazine received two regional awards among publications under 80,000 in circulation:

Gold in the original research category for “Six Sigma Saves a Fortune” (January/February 2007)
Bronze in the case history category for “Processing of Damaged Inventory” (March/April 2007)
For a national organization to recognize our work as outstanding is indeed an honor. Entries are judged by experienced business editors across the country and in varying industries. 
The fact that these two entries garnered the esteem of the judges is no surprise. We entered the Final Tollgate project review and Research report because those features are favorites of readers and of ours. The authors and team members invest a significant amount of time and effort on them. In particular, Research Manager Michael Marx and Executive Editor Erin Ducceschi pour hours into ensuring that the information is relevant, complete, accurate and useful. And that’s just the bones – much more goes into polishing an article before it’s published.
Working with such a knowledgeable, talented team is exciting. And it’s even more exciting to get to brag about their accomplishments.
Check out the articles in the digital edition:
"Six Sigma Saves a Fortune”"Processing of Damaged Inventory”
If you aren’t a subscriber, you can sign up at isixsigma-magazine.com.
Speaking of awards, don’t miss your chance to be “award winning.” iSixSigma is accepting entries until Nov. 1 for several awards that will recognize breakthrough improvement:

iSixSigma’s Six Sigma Hall of Fame 
Largest Breakthrough Improvement projects in several categories 
Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Six Sigma Program
Find out more at live.isixsigma.com/awards.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:34:38 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: My journey towards Lean]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/my_journey_towards_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When I started in continuous improvement (CI) four years ago it was via the traditional Six Sigma DMAIC route. I was indoctrinated into the Six Sigma world and have earned my ASQ CSSBB and can do impressive stuff with statistics. Lean was not even on the radar for me, it was just another approach that was used to solve the easy stuff. It did not have the rigour to make lasting improvements.
Then Lean appeared through our training material and we merged it to become Lean Six Sigma. But it was an unequal partnership. We had the DMAIC model with Lean as a bolt-on included in the Analyse phase. It focussed on analysing and removing waste in the process. It was a pretty easy concept; by removing waste you become a Lean business. And that’s how it stayed, everyone understood Lean.
Meanwhile I had nagging doubts that pure Six Sigma did not provide a complete package. There are the obvious issues around needing to include project management, stakeholder management, soft-skills training and deployment program management. There was also the concern that it was too generalist as specialist niches become prevalent, e.g. Customer Experience theory now goes way beyond the VoC approach. 
It started with The Goal. I really liked the concept of managing your process around exploiting the constraints &amp; bottle-necks. Then I met a few people who had started their CI journey from Lean who talked about different concepts &amp; approaches. Then I met someone who was a Systems Thinker and they thought Six Sigma was just plain wrong. Give these quotes a go, (more in a follow-up blog as I am still reading the book):

It starts with ‘define’ so the wrong problems get tackled, not the actual problems, which will only be revealed when you study the organisation as a system.
Loads of money is spent on training tools, most of which will never be used; and tools are not the means for changing the system. 
The reporting systems ensure benefits are ‘realised’ but they are, most often, spurious e.g. claiming productivity improvements through speeding up part of a process with no knowledge of the impact on the end-to-end process 
It has been used to focus on cost; managers should instead get focused on value as the better way to reduce costs and increasing capacity. 
In short, Six Sigma is a classic packaged invention aimed at gullible managers. The wrong facts are misleading; we should salute its demise.
All good stuff to challenge the orthodoxy. So I have been studying pure Lean. First problem I had was translating the tools out of manufacturing into a service organisation. With things like SMED you seem to have to abstract the concept and look for applications. Or 5S, it’s not a safety issue having a messy desk and I am doubtful on the benefits (I have a clean desk). But as I got deeper I found this doesn’t do Lean justice, the fundamental principles and practises go way beyond “just eliminate waste”. Lean seems to provide much more in terms of the complete package and inparticular around empowering people.
As ever, I still have my doubts e.g. how does break-though innovation happen in a Lean environment? And what about the “Lean is just removal of waste” label? But it has definitely shifted my thinking. Now I am "Learning to See" I wonder if there are any other approaches I should be looking at?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 06:46:13 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lincoln Electric Six Sigma]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/lincoln_electric_six_sigma.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lincoln Electric, a world leader in the design, development and manufacture of welding equipment, improves operational efficiency through Six Sigma AND fosters innovation at the same time. Looks like we’ve got some benchmarking to do.  

“In the last three years, Chairman, President and CEO John M. Stropki has led his team through eight acquisitions and joint ventures while also training hundreds of employees around the world in Six Sigma.”
“The company would focus its efforts on recruiting top talent, increasing customer service, improving operational efficiency, expanding globally and fostering innovation from 2005 through 2007.”
This cover story article in SmartBusiness does not get into the specifics about Six Sigma, but it does get specific about strategy and execution.  Here is a company that uses Six Sigma as a means to reach short term strategic goals.  The focus is not Six Sigma for Six Sigma’s sake, but Six Sigma for strategic sake.
Joining forces, SmartBusiness, October 2008
Additional Lincoln Electric Six Sigma Links
Lincoln Electric Wins Award for World-Class Customer Service
Choose Wisely.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Industrial]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:33:03 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Global Six Sigma Salary Survey]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/global_six_sigma_salary_survey.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
It’s time again for iSixSigma to gather salary data for the 6th annual Global Six Sigma Salary Survey. This survey is a little different that our traditional kind. To gather data we go to the iSixSigma Job Shop database where thousands of Six Sigma professionals have uploaded their resumes. Along with uploading a resume, we ask a few questions about six sigma certification, education, experience, location, current salary and bonus.
Even if you are not in the market for a job you can participate in the survey by creating a free account and answering the required data fields. You do not have to upload a resume if you do not want to.
We only collect data from Job Shoppers who have updated their resume since the end of last year. This keeps the data fresh and relevant. If you have a Job Shop account already please log in and update your information today. If not, I encourage you to create a free account. Please help us make this year’s survey a success.  The final data will be featured in the March/April issue of iSixSigma Magazine.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:15:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Take a Walk on the W.O.W. Side]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/take_a_walk_on_the_wow_side.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[                TM                     
Good enough is just not good enough anymore and has not been for a long time.  We have become a society of "I want it all" and "I want it now".  Today, in particular, as prices continue to rise and people are feeling the pinch, customers are becoming less tolerant of errors, delays and poor service and instead are demanding excellence.  The time is right for a resurgence of customer delight.  How?  By providing Customer W.O.W.        
What’s Needed   -     On Time   -    With Value 
Sounds simple, but if it was, anyone could do it.  What makes creating W.O.W. so tricky is that the components are constantly changing.  "What’s Needed" today will be old news tomorrow.  If you don’t believe that ask anyone with a teenager.  It would seem that as soon as you buy the latest cell phone with all the bells and whistles, another phone hits the market that does twice as much.  
The definition of "On Time" has also taken on new meaning.  The "I want it now" mentality requires that products and services be delivered exactly when the customer wants them and technology has made this expectation a reality.  Need a book - download it.  Want some shoes - order from Zappos and get them delivered the next day.   Wait two weeks for anything - are you kidding?
But the most volatile component of the W.O.W. equation is "With Value".   Value is defined as relative worth, merit or importance.  And yes - it is the customer that will define this for your product or service.  And yes, they can change their definition as often as they want.
Like it or not, the road to Customer W.O.W. is constantly changing.  If you want to "Take a Walk on the W.O.W. Side"™ you’ll need to figure out how to quickly adapt to these changing needs.   Join me over the next several weeks as we step our way through a framework for creating customer W.O.W.  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 06:57:40 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Rigmarole]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/rigmarole.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Six Sigma is an amazingly persistent program. I was left off the list for the official birth announcement, but someone should probably be planning ahead for a thirtieth birthday party in the next few years. That’s remarkable longevity for trumped up flavor-of-the-month program.
I think Six Sigma is utterly absurd in many respects. Even if you love the methodology, you have to admit that the jargon and belt terminology are over the top. Honestly, to the uninitiated we must sound like a group of arcane techno-monks spoiling for a fight. We're the drag queens of the quality world. Six Sigma training methods are generally excruciating, and often rooted in dubious pedagogy. Quality control at the program level is non-existent. Statistical methods are routinely abused. Many conclusions reach are just plain wrong. I can see all this quite clearly, and I like the program.
So why does Six Sigma survive? If it is patently ridiculous, potentially misleading on crucial questions, and generally very annoying, why do people keep using it? The answer is simple, I think: because despite all that, it works. But not for the reasons you might expect.
Consider the window dressing that accompanies a full-blown Six Sigma project. For the sake of this example, let’s assume we’re looking at one of the first projects in an organization. The process probably kicked off with the search for a consulting partner. Six Sigma consultants come at great expense, so some native set of requirements likely kicked in that required multiple consultancies to be evaluated by a high-level team. Once the consultant was picked, candidates for training had to be selected. Because the training is so expensive, this again required a great deal of concerted time and attention from the organization. Ditto for project selection. Finally training takes place, and everyone has to learn a whole new dictionary. The project gets rolling, toll gate reviews start up, and they’re unlike any project meetings ever seen before. No one really understands anything. Questions are asked, arguments begun, experts called in. Eventually paths forward are determined, and execution starts. Implementation is carefully staged and monitored because, let’s face it, no one involved can afford for the project to fail at this point. Results occur, processes are changed, metrics are reported, and success is celebrated. Everyone is happy, and not a little bit relieved. Now repeat, and repeat, and repeat.
That’s a lot of rigmarole. And it’s generally considered to be the ugly side of Six Sigma, the messy underbelly that necessarily accompanies the elegant statistical approach, the data driven decision making. But I think that view gets it backward, suggests that the tail wags the dog. Far from being undesirable, I think all that rigmarole is actually what adds the value in the whole process. I’m convinced the content of the program is immaterial. All the program content needs to do is trigger the window dressing, because the window dressing is what gets the right people in the room.
Let me put it another way. Many companies hire consultants to do things that they supposedly cannot do for themselves. But it is sometimes the case that consultants come in to the organization and seek answers to the question being asked entirely within the organization. Which is strange because logically, consultants are not needed if the answer is already present in the population hiring the consultant. (If you haven’t experienced this phenomenon you might think I‘m making it up. But ask around, because I’m sure you won’t have to go too far to find someone who can provide relevant story from your part of the world.) Development of corporate strategy is an archetypal example. So why use consultants in such cases? They are extremely expensive, and the answer is already there. Well, you use them precisely because they are expensive. Writing that check triggers a set of behaviors in the organization. It forces important players to take notice. It makes it politically dangerous to ignore the outcome of the project. It means people show up at meetings and complete their action items on time. And all that means that the answer is suddenly taken very seriously, even if it was known all along, and even if it happens to be incorrect.
I think Six Sigma works the same way. The crushing structure, bureaucracy, and cost of a deployment sends all kinds of signals to the organization that the program is important and needs to be taken seriously. I’m not saying it makes sense, but I am saying it works. All the rigmarole serves the very important purpose of getting the right people in the room, which means decisions can be made and execution can happen. The guts of the program don’t matter, as long as it serves that purpose in the end. Six Sigma does this by accident rather than by design, but it nonetheless does it very well. And that’s why I think we should probably be planning for a thirtieth birthday party.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Dinnertime Surveys]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/dinnertime_surveys.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  
Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:39:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Erie County Saves a Cool 1.5 Mil]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/erie_county_saves_a_cool_15_mil.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Erie County’s Six Sigma initiative is set to save 1.5 million dollars by year end. Almost a half million more than the initial goal.  Below is the news reporting the story.  Interviews with Al Hammonds, Deputy County Executive and former Six Sigma Director as well as the new Six Sigma Director Bill Carey.
http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=61254&amp;provider=gnews
Yet still Erie has naysayers...in bold is the nayism followed by my thoughts:

Savings could have been found without Six Sigma: True, Al and I both agree on that. But would have the savings been found without any structure, and would have they been able to measure the savings?  I think not. If they could have done it, they should have done it, but they were not doing it. Enter Six Sigma.  See 1.5 million in savings.
Wastes Employees time, taking them off the job for Six Sigma meetings: No one likes a worthless meeting, but if Six Sigma meetings contribute to the $1.5 million saved...we need to have more Six Sigma meetings. Plus for that to be a valid point we’d have to Pareto chart the actual time wasting activities employees engage in... and see where the biggest opportunities for improvement are.  My educated guess is that time "wasted" in Six Sigma meetings is much smaller than say water cooler talk, late to work, sick when your actually not sick...that list is endless. 
Department heads could have found savings themselves: Refer to first bullet. 
Instead of paying Six Sigma Director’s salary of $110,000: Yes, I agree. $110,000 is not what Erie county should be paying the Six Sigma Director.  According to iSixSigma’s 2008 Salary survey, the average salary for a Six Sigma deployment leader in the Northeast is $126,250.  Give this guy a raise.  
Erie County Says Six Sigma Has Exceeded Goals, wgrz.com, October 8, 2008]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:00:56 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Dominion Travels Six Sigma Style]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/dominion_travels_six_sigma_style.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Barq’s isn’t the only thing with bite. At Dominion, it’s Six Sigma that gives data teeth. Director of travel and corporate services, Donna Kelliher, said in a recent Travel Procurement cover story article:

"You can do those quick analyses, but when you put Six Sigma behind it, you’re using statistical tools and people will buy the outcome.  I have found it to be very useful in validating, with teeth." 
The article is a mini case study detailing Dominion’s success using Six Sigma to save money in the corporate travel processes.  

"Donna Kelliher likes to challenge the status quo, and her intuition, coupled with savvy implementation of Six Sigma analysis, has shaken some of the holiest of sacred cows in business travel. Booking air travel in advance always saves money? Not. Using nonrefundable fares always save money? Nope. These guidelines work for many companies and in many markets, but Kelliher’s research proved they do not always work, shattering the assumption that such general rules are so solid they might as well be mandates."
Everyone knows that the entire travel service sector could use some process improvement...but what about your own company’s internal travel procedures?  Are they based on travel protocol from the 1990s?  That’s so last millennium.  With the rising cost of travel (fuel, baggage, on-board sodas) looking into how your company spends money getting employees from here to there can only be a good thing.  Take some advice from Dominion and give your travel data that Six Sigma bite!
Diagnosis By Six Sigma: Dominion’s Kelliher Treats Travel Mgmt. Ailments With Holistic Remedies, Travel Procurement, September 2008]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Business Services&nbsp;,&nbsp;Energy&nbsp;,&nbsp;Travel &amp; Leisure]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:38:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Company Policy – Help or Hindrance?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/company_policy__help_or_hindrance.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I recently bought some registry cleaning software on the internet using PayPal. My mistake, it was a scam. I made contact with the PayPal Dispute Resolution team to see if I could get my money back. Followed the highly efficient process (no human interaction) and made repeated attempts to contact the supplier before escalating to PayPal to resolve. Automated e-mail response, it is not their company policy to resolve this type of situation. I sent a follow-up e-mail but got another response talking about, “we are unable to blah, blah, blah….” So made contact with my credit card company and they gave me an immediate refund, their company policy was to resolve this type of situation.
Given I represent about 0.000000001% of their revenue I’m not a big loss, but to what degree can company policy be an incentive or disincentive to the customer experience?  
A company policy sets the guidelines for a companies activities and helps staff in areas where there appears to be latitude in deciding how best to operate. You could see company policy as one-way of defining the culture of the company and what is seen as important.

In a bureaucratic culture the policy might be shown as over complicated forms, slow decision making and having to always follow the company defined process
In a cost-cutting culture the policy might be shown as looking to use the cheapest channels to market (e.g. web &amp; e-mail) with a gradual decline in overall proposition
In a profit-driven culture the policy might be shown in overuse of cross-sell and up-sell and constant marketing communications
In a political culture the policy might be shown as a fragmented proposition as different teams use customers for their own political games
In a customer-centric culture the policy might show empowered staff being given the flexibility to do what’s right for the customer 
So when designing a customer policy it seems the key question to answer is, “from whose point of view should it be done?” From a Lean Six Sigma perspective this should be “outside-in” focussing on the Voice of the Customer. Not, to quote Carol from Little Britain, “Computer says no”. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 08:03:20 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean Banking]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_banking.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I can’t help but wonder if banking and finance has an administrative concept equal or similar to lean process strategic planning. 
As accounting goes I suspect that efficiency, correct mathematical computation and balanced accounts all are considered important and of value to the banking customer.  But what is the value added to high or irresponsible risk? 
Certainly the possible return is always measured against the potential risk, but if all investment were guaranteed by some umbrella organization then we all would be in the banking business. 
Seems very clear that lean thinking, customer value and reduction of waste is missing in the deliberations of some companies in the finance industry. Maybe they could learn something from the manufacturing industry? 
Just a thought.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:46:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: SSGs Advice]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/ssgs_advice.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  
Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 09:17:20 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Photos of iSixSigma Live! Denver]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/photos_of_isixsigma_live_denver.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Jeannine Hall and I returned home from the wild night out in Denver last night. The Social and Networking Party in downtown Denver was a success: people met, mingled, ate, drank and made new friends. Over 100 Denver-ites registered for this event, and we hope to have even more the next time. Thanks to our host, BMGI, we had a fantastic meeting space -- their beautiful training facility in the Tabor Center.
You can view the slideshow of the Denver Live! event here. (Press the "fast" link in the upper left hand corner to speed up the pace.)
The Party featured interesting people, fantastic conversations, an open bar, a lavish appetizer buffet, music, and a raffle (books, Minitab garb, BMG elearning, a $100 gift certificate to the iSixSigma Store, and much more). No one left disappointed -- even if they didn’t win a door prize, everyone walked away with an iSixSigma Live! goodie bag full of sponsor offers, tschochkes, coupons and discounts.
Thanks to everyone in the local area who came out, and thanks to all our wonderful sponsors for taking part in this fantastic event:



View the full photo gallery here: http://photos.isixsigma.com/photos/swfpopup.mg?AlbumID=6070505&amp;AlbumKey=zCVhY
Visit iSixSigma Live! and view our upcoming event calendar.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:24:50 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The L Word]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_l_word.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That would be "Leadership."  I've been given a definition of leadership that I'd like to discuss with you and ask your opinion about.
The question that was posed to me was, "What is a leader?"
I gave what I thought was a pretty good response - about having a vision, bringing people along in the direction needed to support the vision, and instilling accountability as a management philosophy.
But, I was told that I was wrong.  A leader, I was told, is one who has followers.
So, if followers are appointed or assigned, a person is a leader?  I asked.
Just so, I was told.  And if you don't have followers, then you aren't a leader.
Now, this caused me some ego anxiety, particularly as I am currently self-employed and don't have any assigned followers at the moment.  (Although I've had plenty in the past.)  So, I used to be a leader but now I'm not, but I might be again in the future?
I did a little research on this concept and it turns out that there is a saying, There is one irrefutable definition of a leader, and that is someone people follow.  However, I've seen that attributed to Drucker (seems like he should know what he's talking about), but also to Michael Maccoby (management consultant and author, unfamiliar to me).
It occurred to me that maybe "leadership" is a term like "quality."  You can have good quality, or poor quality.  When we say that we have a quality process, however, we're implying that we have a high-quality process.  (I hope.)  So, for the term "leadership," maybe we're implying "positive leadership."  And, going back to the statement that a leader is someone who has followers, I see that it's a neutral type of definition.  Cult leaders, presidents of countries, Ghandi, front-line supervisors, Hitler - all of them leaders by that definition.
So, maybe I need to be a little more specific when talking about (and answering questions about) leadership.  If anyone has operational definitions or comments that they'd like to share, I'd love to continue my education on this topic!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 11:20:23 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Back to Basics]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/back_to_basics.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I recently spent the night in Chicago at the Hyatt Regency McCormick Place.  When I arrived, I could tell by the friendly faces and fast moving check-in lines that they have been listening to the Voice of the Customer.  But the big surprise came at 5 a.m. the next day.   I like having a back-up to my alarm and always ask for a wake-up call.  When the phone rang the next morning I lifted the receiver anticipating the yip-yak of some computer generated voice alerting me that it’s time to get moving.  Instead, I was pleasantly surprised by a real person.  "Hello Mrs. Clark, This is your 5 a.m. wake-up call."  I immediately responded "Thank you" and received a "Your Welcome, I hope you enjoy your day in Chicago".  I smiled.  How very nice, I thought.  They even reminded me which city I woke up in. (Those of you who travel a lot can appreciate this)  
It is funny how such a small gesture can make a big difference.  Just the fact that I am talking about it four days later lets you know what an impression it made (Net promoter score will be high on this one).   I wonder if somewhere along the way in our zeal to cut cost and automate everything that we’ve lost the personal touch that makes us human.  Maybe it’s time we revisit the Voice of the Customer and get "Back to Basics."]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 06:53:21 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma MVP Awards]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_mvp_awards.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Here’s some news you may not have heard yet... iSixSigma will be serving up some sweet awards at a breakfast ceremony during the iSixSigma Live! Miami conference.  All the details on each award can be found at: http://live.isixsigma.com/awards/default.html 
The iSixSigma MVP awards are my favorites... We’re looking for the: 
Most prolific poster on iSixSigma discussion forumsMost useful/helpful poster on iSixSigma discussion forumsBest iSixSigma BloggerBest commenter on the Blogosphere
If you participate in the forums or blogs, it’s time to get your game on. Impress the judges (aka iSixSigma editorial team) with your helpful and insightful prose and you just may walk away an iSixSigma MVP.  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:41:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live! Denver - 2 Spots Remaining]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_live_denver_2_spots_remaining.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you live in the Denver, Colorado, area or are planning to be in town next Thursday, 9/25, be sure to make your way over to the Tabor Center for the iSixSigma Live! Social and Networking Party in Denver. Only 2 RSVP spots remain, so don’t delay -- sign up today.
Our first Social and Networking Party in Seattle was talked about for weeks after the event. We’re still receiving email requests to hold the next event -- and as soon as we get past the DoD Breakthrough Convention that iSixSigma Live has been hired to organize, we will! The photo archive from Seattle can be seen here.
This iSixSigma Live! event will unite and strengthen the Denver-area community of business process improvement leaders at all levels.
This social and networking party is an after-work social event for all Denver area quality professionals. We will have appetizers, an open bar, music, events and the most exciting change agents from leading Denver-based organizations. This is the one local event you don’t want to miss!
Attendees will include anyone involved or interested in process improvement. This includes current and aspiring Six Sigma professionals (Green Belts, Black Belts, Master Black Belts, Champions, Deployment Leaders, etc.), Lean experts, transformation leaders, continuous improvement professionals, Kaizen leaders, business process management managers, process excellence managers, students – you get the idea. Just remember, this is a social and networking party for change leaders and business professionals; so leave your catapults and control charts at home!
See who’s already signed up to attend!
Our wonderful sponsors for this Social and Networking event include:



Come meet, greet, chat and ask all those questions you’ve been meaning to ask these Six Sigma providers all these years!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:50:05 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Team Dynamics for College Seniors]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/team_dynamics_for_college_seniors.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have the privilege this semester of teaching a "Professional Practice" class for college seniors in Clinical Laboratory Science.  These are the folks who will be doing (among other things) any blood tests that you may have drawn in a doctor's office, hospital, or health fair.
Since I had input into the curriculum, I decided to teach a module on personality preferences, so I could link that to effective team management.  I used the DISC (r) model that is widely available.  You may be familiar with it - there are four categories of behavior preferences.  It's a useful shorthand for understanding one's preferred way of behaving.  I use the model to teach self-awareness, as a bridge to awareness of others (or, as we may say in Lean, respect for people!).
I shared the basic information about the four quadrants, and then asked the class of 25 to divide themselves up into the groups as they saw themselves:  Dominance ("Let's just do it and get it over with!" and "No touchy-feely stuff for me!"), Influence ("Let's hear everyone's great stories!" and "Let's have fun with this!"), Steadiness ("Let's understand why we're doing this, first of all!" and "Let's make sure everyone feels comfortable with this."), and Conscientious ("We need to know that we're making the right decision!" and "If only everyone would just do things the RIGHT way!").
Then, I asked each group to come with ideas for employee recognition, in about 10 minutes.
Lo and behold, I couldn't have asked for a better demonstration!
The Dominance group, about 25% of the class, was done first and had one sticky-note with 5 ideas on it, all related to individual rewards, such as a bonus or preferred parking space.
The Steadiness group, about a third of the class, was done next and had 5 sticky-notes with ideas related to personal rewards and also social rewards - mostly activities with groups that could be shared.
The Conscientious group, about 40% of the class, was not finished by the 10 minute mark; they asked for more time.  They had stopped at their first idea, a certificate of recognition, and their sticky-note had a full paragraph about the wording and appearance of the certificate.
(There was only one "Influencer" so I had her join one of the other groups.)
The students had a lot of fun with this exercise.  They all started comparing their friends and acquaintances, and I reminded them that a) this was a situational-sensitive preference, and everyone displays all of the traits at various times, and b) not to stereotype anyone else!
I thought it was a great opportunity to get students, near the beginning of their profession, to understand a little about personal dynamics when working in groups.  I hope it pays big dividends when they get out into the "real world."
How many of you use a personality-type profile or assessment when your teams are in their forming-norming stages?  Please share your best practices!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:16:17 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Laundering]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_laundering.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There’s been quite a bit of Six Sigma laundering going on these days…Gianna’s post, Dirty Socks, Ron Pereira's posts, Laundy Kaizen and How to Fold a T-Shirt in Two Motions, and now we have this video segment from MSNBC.  
Northeast Laundromat owners Leonard and Jennifer Cooperman, in St. Petersburg Florida, were the recipients of MSNBC’s Your Business small business makeover. MSNBC brought in Six Sigma consultant and author Greg Brue to sort through the dirty laundry and come up with data based suggestions for improving their business.  
I think it’s a nice piece on Six Sigma for small business. Watch and enjoy.  (It’s only 4:24 plus an introductory ad.)
 
My marketing suggestion for Leonard and Jennifer Cooperman…two words: Seth Godin.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:52:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The French Poodle]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_french_poodle.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:50:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Thinking Ahead]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/thinking_ahead.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One of the central problems all organizations face is balancing long term thinking with short terms needs. It is clear that time and resources need to be devoted to both; companies that live moment to moment don’t survive very long, while those that focus on the big picture without worrying about the details usually don’t live long enough for their vision to matter. So the question isn’t which is more important, the question is how to do both simultaneously.
The strategies :

Ask everyone in the organization to simultaneously focus on long term vision and short term execution. 
This is the most intuitively attractive answer. It’s the one that various business books and seminars recommend. And it would be a great strategy if it could be pulled off, but I’ve never seen it happen. Toyota might be a counter-example based on books I have read, but I’m guessing insiders could educate me about the ways in which it is difficult there as well. If you know of others, please comment.
The problem with this strategy in my experience is that firefighting always wins. No business I’ve ever seen has been willing to let a short term issue fester in favor of providing time for employees to think about the long term. “Oh, I’m sorry we just short-shipped out biggest customer…but we’re in a long range planning retreat this week so I’ll deal with it on Monday”. That sort of thing gets you fired at most companies. There’s no question which takes precedence.
Interestingly, I think continuous improvement as it is practiced today is part of the problem rather than the solution. Many companies now run so lean in terms of personnel that there is no excess capacity to fight minor fires, and everything becomes an emergency. At the same time, positions on the floor and elsewhere have been time-studied to death, so there is no extra seconds in the day to devote to long term thinking. Individual projects are optimized like crazy with very little though given to the whole. I know it’s not supposed to be this way, but often it is.
The answer to this is widely seen as the next strategy.

Ask everyone to worry about long term vision and strategy at certain times, while focusing on short term execution the rest of the time.
Future state mapping is a great example of this strategy. You haul people out of their normal responsibilities for a few days to consider what the future state should look like. People who are practiced at this develop not only an ideal state, but a few interim states along the way as well. Then when the mapping is done, the team goes back to their regular jobs, which are usually execution focused.
The follow-on strategy often involves projects and/or Kaizen events. Both of those can work. Projects work by forcing project leaders (and sometimes their teams) to continue working towards a long term goal, balancing that with their short term responsibilities. In essence this strategy works by forcing the first strategy (above) to occur for some period of time. Because projects are inherently limited in duration, this can be successful. Kaizen events, on the other hand, work by forcing the second strategy to occur for some period of time. Both projects and Kaizen events function by preventing the natural tendency of an organization to focus on short term needs.
The problem with this strategy is that the short term and long term thinking usually become divorced from one another. The classic example of this is annual “Strategic Planning” (which goes by many names), wherein everyone works like crazy for a month or two to prepare an X-year plan and get approval for it up the chain. Then once that’s done, the plan it put away and never seen again. Everyone goes back to managing the short term. Projects and Kaizen events still occur – and may even help the organization –but they are rarely explicitly connected to the broad strategic plan.
Recognition of this tendency is, I think, what makes the third strategy most common.

Employ a few people to worry full-time about long term vision and strategy, while most others focus on short term execution.
This is a very common answer. Maybe the most common. Especially in corporations for which selling the product (or otherwise dealing with a customer) is resource intensive. Consider a retail chain, for example. If there are  1000 people working for the company, 900 of them might be on the sales floor selling products directly to customers. Another 50 might work in logistics (distribution, transportation, warehousing, etc), perhaps another 25 are support staff of some sort. On a good day, that might leave 25 people to think about long term strategy for the company. And not just standard business strategies like how to market, what to sell, and where to operate, but also things like how to attract and retain employees, where to hedge and where to spot-buy, and who to fire. Oh, and maybe how to run a continuous improvement program.
If you are part of an organization, you probably already know the problems that crop up here. In the example above, 25 people who are sitting somewhere other than the front lines are trying to determine strategy for the 975 who actually know first-hand what is going on. The ones who are closest to direct feedback and subtle shift are the ones least empowered to influence and select the strategy. It’s a set up doomed to failure for all but the most talented (and rare) of leaders. It’s a strategy that looks good in theory, but is devilishly hard to successfully practice. And even when you get it right, you’re not taking advantage of the knowledge and expertise of all those people out in the field.
The saving grace for this strategy, and the reason it is so common, is that it is a stable structure. Even if it isn’t a great strategy overall, it’s better than the other two because it is tenable. It is a compromise way for the organization overall to pay attention to both short term and long term thinking, even if no individual within the company is doing so. It survives and flourishes not because it is a great way of doing things, but because it is slightly better than the alternatives.
Is there a better way?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live! Seattle Video]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_live_seattle_video.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you haven't had a chance to view our latest video of the iSixSigma Live! Social and Networking Party in Seattle, here's your chance:
 
If you attended, be sure to forward this page to your friends and ask them to see if they can spot you! :)
The photo gallery from iSixSigma Live! Seattle is also available.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 11:07:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Manufacturing]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/manufacturing.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For a hobby last year I started making cider (hard cider in the US). Below are some of the demijohns of apple juice I fermented. 

I cracked open a finished bottle and it looked &amp; smelt great, but the taste…. it was insipid, slightly acidic and low in alcohol. Not good. Being in the business of continuous improvement and this being my second year I am ready to develop my manufacturing process.
I have researched the issues and my proposed solutions are.

Insipidness: I believe was due to using just eating apples, it should have been a blend of eating, cooking and crab apples. Here is a sample of my raw materials



Acidity: I have my pH tester and acid reduction solution.

Alcohol: I have my hydrometer and bag of sugar to up the alcohol content. 
So the question is what makes the perfect product? What better than to design an experiment. Being by no means an expert in the practical design of DoE, here is my endeavour. The factors &amp; levels seem to be:




 Factor
 Levels

 pH reading 
 Two levels. Initial pH of blend or set to pH of 3.8 (which is highest recommended level)

 Sugar content
 Two levels. Initial natural sugar content or adjusted to give final product of 7% alcohol

 Apple Blend
 Tricky, I want to try different combinations but not at the extremes of 100% of any one. I would like to get my blends by having variations of eating apples from 40 to 80%, cooking apples from 40 to 80% and crab apple from 0 to 20%. Not sure on this bit yet, could do with some help
The output will be taste tests scored from 0 to 10. I have a limited number of trails as I only have 8 demijohns. this should create the product to scale-up next year. Any tips on the best design to ensure I get good results?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 03:35:13 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: 5S Your Email Out-Box]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/5s_your_email_out_box.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After reading my last post, 5S Your Email In-Box, a couple of colleagues asked whether they could apply 5S to sending emails as well.  Here are the guidelines that I use - I'm sure others have their methods, too, so feel free to share your own best practices!
SORT
1.  Ask yourself, does the recipient really need this email?  What is it that you want them to do with it when they get it?  What makes this email, out of the 250 they will receive today, worthy of their stressed and limited time?  If it's not needed, don't send it.  (But, see the note about thank-you emails below.)
2.  Be careful of cc's (copy-to) and bcc's (blind copies).  Don't add people to the distribution list as a way to let the primary recipient know that you don't trust them to take action, or you're setting up a blame-sharing scenario (trust me, they'll figure this out without you telling them).  And I've been burned by bcc'ing something to which the bcc'd individual responded by hitting reply-all.  Very embarrassing.
3.  Know when to pick up the phone.  For any email with more than 3 back-and-forth volleys, I call the person to finish the conversation.  And some communication just shouldn't be done by email.  You already know that readers can attribute "tone of voice" to email communications, so if you've got something sensitive or confidential to share, do it in person or by phone.
STRAIGHTEN
1.  Help recipients know what you want them to do with the email.  Put it in the title:  Project XXX (please read and provide feedback by Friday).  Status of Team YYY (please respond with any questions).  Action Plan for Department ZZZ (Urgent - Action Needed by End of Business Day).  Meeting Notes from xx/yy/zz (Review and File).
2.  Remember that a lot of folks scan through emails using the Preview function.  Put the most important things in the top 2 or 3 lines of the email, including an executive summary, action requested and deadlines (if not in the title).
3.  If you're sending to more than one person, be very clear if there are specific action items requested of some individuals, versus the expectation that they will read-and-review.
SCRUB
1.  If the email is longer than a couple of paragraphs, consider sending an attachment instead.  Within the email, use bullet points to draw attention to important issues.  Use bolding (sparingly) to draw the eye to essential points or deadlines.
2.  If you are sending an attachment, consider sending the .pdf version to save space.
3.  Review your email before sending it.  Take out any unnecessary verbage - be concise and at the end, close by saying something like "please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns about the above."  Trust that your readers will let you know if they need more info.
STANDARDIZE
1.  Many time-management experts think that you should set a certain time aside each day to read and reply to emails.  In the spirit of continuous flow, that doesn't work for me, but only you can decide how to handle your inbox.  Pick a method that works for you, and practice it.
2.  You can sort your sent mail into folders, so you can easily find it again - it's an option you can consider.  Also, did you know that you can drag your sent email into your in-box folders?  That way you can keep all your to-and-from correspondence together, if that works for you.
SUSTAIN
1.  Make up a little email audit form to review when sending email, comprised of the check-points you want to review before you hit send.  Mine looks like this:

Check, do all recipients need this email?  Check cc's.  Phone instead?
Action requested vs review - clear to all recipients?
Concise enough?  Need attachment?
OK to go?
I've been asked about those little "thank you" or acknowledgement emails; some people love them, some think they're a waste of email space.  I love to get them, I appreciate them, I feel warm and fuzzy about them, and then I delete them.
A note about tracking:  To me, it always feels a bit like "Big Brother is watching you" when I get the notice that the sender wants to know when I've read the email.  I use tracking very sparingly; I'd rather set a reasonable timeframe for response and then give the recipient a nudge if they don't get back to me.  But, it's a personal preference; I know some people who track all their emails (just as I know some who flag every email "high importance").
Lastly:  Your email signature / contact info is an essential part of business communication.  Don't just sign "love, Sue" - if someone needs to call you back or fax you a response, it's very frustrating to have to go searching for the information.  The basics include:  Name, title, company, mailing address, phone, fax, email, website if there is one.  Use with caution:  motivational quotes, images that add size to the email, blinking or moving graphics, background stationary, fonts other than web-safe (arial, verdana, courier, times new roman).
Now that I've shared my preferences, I'd love to know what other methods you are using to send emails in a lean manner!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 05:51:17 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Houston, TX Lean and Six Sigma Pros Unite!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/houston_tx_lean_and_six_sigma_pros_unite.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There will be a Lean and Six Sigma meeting in Houston, TX, on Thursday, September 18, 2008 at 5:30 PM. Tom Tatevasion of Cameron will host the event. Tom will provide an overview of the group, a tour of the Cameron Compression Systems facility, and discuss their Lean Six Sigma program.
If you live in Houston and are practicing Lean or Six Sigma, you do not want to miss this event.
To learn more:
Join the iSixSigma Network on LinkedIn
Learn more about this learning and networking event]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 17:10:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Hi-def]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/hi_def.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 21:13:56 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: 5S Your Email In-box]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/5s_your_email_in_box.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I love to open my business email in-box in the morning, don't you?  Especially if you've been practicing good work-life balance and haven't peeked at it since the end of business the day before.  When I go on vacation, it's a special treat.
Here's a 5S strategy that I have used to keep up with the "input."  [Note:  I'm using MS Office terminology since that's what I'm most familiar with - please substitute your own email application terms as you read.]
SORT
1.  If you've been gone a few days, or have LOTS of email to go through, sort the senders by name.  Tackle your boss's emails first, then other VIPs, then go down the list in order of importance to your current task load or priority projects.
2.  Be ruthless.  If you don't need to know it, "red-tag" the item by dragging it over to the "Deleted Items" box.  [Added action:  If you hate getting those cute kitten-pictures and the latest urban rumors from your friends, take 10 seconds to reply to the sender to say tactfully: please don't send them any more.  It's a worthwhile investment, and a true friend will appreciate your need to keep your business in-box for business only.]  
STRAIGHTEN
1.  If you do need to know it, but it's an on-going progress report or something that doesn't need a response, file it immediately under a helpful heading that you will find again.
2.  If you need to take action on an item, you can:  a) Place it in an "action needed by date" folder.  b) Leave it in your inbox as a reminder.  c) See if you can drag it into your Task List - it may convert to a task to which you can add details.  d) See if you can drag it into your calendar - to add it as a calendar item on the day of your choice.  e) Print it and put it in a "to-do" pile.  --The goal is to keep a clear picture of actions that you need to take, in a way that puts you on or ahead of deadline - not frantically searching for the original email when your boss or colleague asks you how you're coming on project X.
SCRUB
1.  Do you archive your emails?  I don't let the computer do it automatically - there are some long-term projects that I need to keep the running history on, all in once place.  When a project is finished, I move the whole folder to archive.
2.  If you email inbox has a restriction on size, you have options:  a) you can save everything to your hard drive or shared drive (open the email, click on FILE then SAVE AS), and then save any attachments to the same place.  There are also applications you can buy or download for free that handle this action.  b) or, at least in MS Office, you can create a .pst file that stores on your hard drive or shared drive, looks just like a folder in your mailbox, and you can store emails there just as you do in your regular mailbox.  Click on FILE, NEW, OUTLOOK DATA FILE.  (Get someone to help you if you have never used this, but after you've done it once it's easy.)  It doesn't usually "count against" your regular mailbox size limitations.  I use this for SENT MAIL since that's what usually kills my in-box size!  For example, SENT-2006, SENT-2007.
STANDARDIZE
1.  There's no one way to organize your folders.  I've seen success with folders by name of sender; week of the month; project name; etc.  A general rule of thumb is to have no more than 3 levels of folders for any one heading - unless you have a perfect memory.  But pick a system and stick with it.
2.  Corollary:  Most of us still use and receive paper in our jobs.  It's a lot easier to find things if your paper filing system matches your email folder structure, so when you try to find your hardcopy master project list for company A in region D related to Widget X, it's under the same paper file folder headings as you would find it if it had been sent electronically.  [Or, get with the new century and scan all documents into your computer, if you have access to a scanner!]
SUSTAIN
1.  Pick a slower-than-usual week, like a holiday week.  Set aside a couple of hours to go through your emails and see what you can archive - what you can discard - what you can file more appropriately.  The investment of time is well worth it.
There are usually many other options in each email system, such as assigning categories to emails or flagging them with various colored flags, that you can delve into as well.
However, the steps above have been helpful for me.  Do any of you have equally effective methods of taming the in-box jungle?  Please share!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:56:05 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Flawed Tie-breaking Rule at Olympics Costs U.S. Gymnast a Gold Medal]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/flawed_tie_breaking_rule_at_olympics_costs_us_gymnast_a_gold_medal.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[An arbitrary and statistically flawed tie-breaking rule cost Nastia Liukin of the United States the gold medal in the women’s uneven bars competition at the Olympics earlier this month, according to Dr. Prasad Raje, CEO of Instantis.
After looking at the tied scores of gymnasts Liukin and He Kexin of China, Raje figures that Liukin actually had a “statistically superior score because there was less variance in the judge’s opinions on who performed better.”
The gymnasts scored the same down to the third decimal place by using the average score from six judges and throwing out the high and low score. So Liukin had scores of 9, 9, 9 and 9.1, and Kexin had scores of 9.1, 9.1, 8.9 and 9. According to the tie-break rule, the winner is determined by throwing out the low score of the four valid remaining scores. As a result, a 9.0 was dropped from Liukin’s scores and an 8.9 from Kexin’s. This meant the outcome was based on the opinions of only three judges – and tilted the gold in favor of Kexin.
Instead of throwing out data points, the judges should have kept all the valid data points, and done a statistical analysis of the “quality” of the data, Raje says. Here’s a figure he developed:

The statistical spread in Liukin’s scores is significantly lower (0.0500) than that of Kexin’s (0.0954). Therefore, according to Raje, Liukin should have got the gold medal.
This shows that those who run the Olympics might find it to their advantage to add a Six Sigma practitioner to their rules committee.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:21:59 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: If Peter Piper Picked a Peck of Prioritized Projects...]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/if_peter_piper_picked_a_peck_of_prioritized_projects.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Which prioritized projects would Peter Piper pick?
I've been asked to speak about project selection at an upcoming symposium.  In doing research for this, I've reviewed articles from iSixSigma and other sources, from both the Six Sigma "ranked project hopper" perspective and the Lean A3 - strategic deployment perspective.  And I've done some project-picking in my time, too, using both those methods. With all the emphasis on data-driven decisions, there's one element that is usually mentioned in passing that may be the most important of all.  And that is... (drum roll please) Which problems are the executive leaders most emotionally driven to resolve?
Even if significant costs can be saved - even if reliability can be improved - even if staffing efficiencies can be realized - in my experience, if the project or deployment champion isn't engaged, you may end up with a beautiful project that won't be sustained.
A trite saying is that "people treasure what their bosses measure."  If one or more leaders is emotionally engaged in a project, they will pester the facilitator and team members.  They will ask for data at inconvenient times.  They will ask whether there are any barriers to be resolved.  They will cheerfully provide resources.  Staff members will know this is important to them, and will respond accordingly.  These leaders will behave in a way that lets everyone know this is important work - they have an obvious commitment to the project and its success.
When leaders are somewhat interested, they may ask questions and be willing to meet, but forward movement is definitely in the realm of the facilitator.  These leaders may be helpful when asked, but they will wait to be asked.  They are pleased to be involved as long as it doesn't take too much effort on their part.
When leaders are not engaged, it's hard to get meeting time with them, and meetings may be frequently postponed or cancelled.  They don't want to be bothered with details about the project.  They only want to know when it's over so they can go back to spending time on their other "more important" activities.
If you've ever led a project, you've seen behavior that falls into one of these categories.  The pain-in-the-butt activist leaders can be the most forward thinking.  The middle-of-the-road hobbyists can be helpful, if always a step behind.  The don't-bother-me-now-can't-you-see-I'm-working types will be happy to take credit once the project is done, but then ignore it to concentrate on other crisis situations.
So I'm suggesting that, while project prioritization matrices and strategic deployment models are great when all of the leaders are equally and emotionally engaged, there may be a simpler method to use when getting started or when engagement is not high across the board.
Have any of you ever selected your project by which executive was most enthusiastic?  It would be great to hear your experiences!
 
p.s.  For those of you detail-oriented folks whose memories are tickled by Peter Piper, it's from the collection of "Mother Goose" rhymes.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:02:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Wants You!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_wants_you.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
A year ago iSixSigma Magazine featured the U.S. Army’s business transformation program in a cover story, recognizing the change management efforts and project successes from one of the largest Lean Six Sigma deployments ever attempted. Since then, ties between the U.S. armed forces and Lean Six Sigma have only gotten stronger.
In May 2008, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England signed Directive 5010.42, which directs defense department services and agencies to adopt Lean Six Sigma. Continuous improvement is no longer an option.
With millions of individuals now part of the deployment, many more people will be introduced to Lean Six Sigma tools. To serve this growing community, iSixSigma publishes a Military Channel (military.isixsigma.com). 
This portal is a resource for everyone associated with the business transformation of the U.S. military. It is designed to provide communication updates on deployments, and the opportunity for military leaders at all levels to learn new skills, advance their careers and contribute to the success of their organizations.
We need your help. We’re looking for article submissions from those of you involved in the continuous improvement movement throughout the U.S. military. Are you a Belt working on projects or providing training? Share your successes and challenges (and how you met them) with the iSixSigma Military Channel audience. Or take some aspect of Six Sigma that you are keenly interested in and expand on it.  
To submit an article, visit: isixsigma.com/submit. Got an idea for an article? Contact me at editorial.com@isixsigma.com.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Military]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:48:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: About Blogger: Jessica Harper]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/about_blogger_jessica_harper.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Jessica Harper is editor of iSixSigma Magazine and iSixSigma.com.
Jessica has held leadership positions at business publications for more than seven years. Before that, she worked in various editorial roles for both web and print publications. She has a bachelor’s degree in English, with a concentration in creative writing and a minor in journalism. Currently, she is working on her Green Belt certification.
She is a member of the Northwest Quality Forum and the International Society of Six Sigma Professionals. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Jessica Harper]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Blogger Bios]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:00:19 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Gage M&amp;M]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/gage_mampm.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
The good folks at Minitab just released a sweet little article about using M&amp;M’s to teach statistics.  It’s called Sweetening Statistics and is written by Michelle Paret and Eston Martz.
If you’ve been through traditional classroom Black Belt training you’ve probably already done these exercises yourself as they have been a part of the traditional Black Belt curriculum for years.  I sure remember them from my Black Belt training days… Break out a few bags of M&amp;M’s during a moment like this and the class goes wild.
The article shows how you can use the measurable qualities of M&amp;M’s to teach many statistical tests including: 1-sample t, paired t, proportion, Chi Square, and Correlation.  They are even good for teaching Gage R&amp;R.  I’d plan on at least on bag per test, M&amp;M’s have a way of disappearing faster than they can be measured...
So the next time one of your friends asks what it is you do for a living, make a party out of it and invite a group over for dessert, then FIRE UP MINITAB!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:49:01 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Small Change Big Impact]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/small_change_big_impact.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Across the globe food prices are rising rapidly. The potential causes are many including big ticket issues like rising demand in emerging markets, oil prices, bio fuels, trade tariffs, global warming, population growth and tight supplies. With all that lot stacked-up its no wonder that prices are going up. Big problems call for big solutions and we have innovations such as GM technology and global cooperation coming to the fore.
But just how efficient is the value-chain of food production? How much waste is built into the process? 
Here in the UK, a recent study by Waste &amp; Resources Action Programme estimated that one third of food people buy is thrown away unused. The report makes incredible reading and examples of annual waste include 1.2 million sausages &amp; 4.4 million apples. This inflates the cost of food as more has to be produced to compensate for the waste.
What kind of improvement could we get if we just ate what we bought? 
Another example is the European Union’s food quality standards that specify the dimensions that fruit &amp; vegetables must reach in order to be class one. Hence if it’s out of spec it doesn’t get through. The food is not dirty, rotten or diseased just misshapen. Luckily these rules are planned to be rolled-back as commented by an EU spokesperson, “People are saying that prices are too high, it makes no sense to be chucking food away. We want to have two classes, allowing supermarkets to sell funny shaped vegetables”. It’s just another form of waste. I have no figures on how much is lost in this part of the value-chain.
I noticed a recent example in the US election. There was talk about how to solve demand for oil and the need to start drilling offshore. Barack Obama comes in with “keep your tyres correctly inflated”. Not sure on the math but throw in cars with better mileage and I would guess its going to have an impact.
The point is it’s just the same in business; there are always the low-hanging fruit (and veg?). Start by doing the big easy wins that cut unnecessary waste. In general they are not particularly radical but can have dramatic outcomes.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:54:30 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: In-Process Indicators]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/in_process_indicators.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:14:30 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Rest of the Story  . . .]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_rest_of_the_story___.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Customer Complaints, appropriately captured and analyzed, can provide useful insight about process defects.  Although complaints are not the preferred method of obtaining the Voice of the Customer (VOC), you should not miss the opportunity to learn from them.   But to do this, proper reporting and segmentation of customer complaints is needed.   This requires that good operational definitions be established.  Often times, this first step is where we fail to capture the granularity of information needed to provide future meaningful analysis.  For example, once a complaint is received and recorded, obtaining more specific information for further analysis will be difficult if not impossible. Categorizing complaints about a product or service as "doesn’t work" or "too hard to use" won’t be much help in identifying the root cause of the problem.
Identifying a good list of complaint "cause codes" for your particular business will take some work but will be worth while in providing information that drives a solution that not only fixes this customer’s complaint but can be used to prevent other customers from experiencing the same type of problem.  It is all too easy to put a band-aid on the customer’s boo-boo and walk away.  After all - this solves the immediate customer’s problem.  But without capturing detailed aspects about the customer complaint, even the best six sigma black belt will be hard pressed to help you understand the rest of the story.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 06:09:48 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Creativity and Lean Process Analysis]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/creativity_and_lean_process_analysis.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This morning as I read Sue Kozlowski’s blog about her husband and the “common sense” factor of lean six-sigma process analysis, I decided to apply this thinking to a recent experience at work. Are there work environments where process analysis should not be applied? Where common sense is the standard? Here is my thought process. 
I recently participated in a collective bargaining negotiation in a public sector organization. I was on the team representing a class of employees who were requesting a reclassification of their pay scale. The process moved from opening statements by each side, directly into negotiation when management made a request to discuss a settlement compromise. Since the arbitrator is hired by both sides to resolve the conflict with a decision based on the evidence presented or some other resolution, he facilitated this mediation process. This certainly was lean thinking at first. If an agreement could be reached we would reduce the time muda that hours of testimony would take up. However, the result was quite the opposite. The management team left the room and the arbitrator volleyed back and forth between the conference rooms we each occupied carrying offers and counter offers. After six hours, where testimony might have taken only three or four, we had a agreement that could be presented to membership for a vote. Now the vote will take a few weeks and if rejected we are back at the hearing with no result and lots of time wasted, but if it is accepted time is saved.  Common sense might have motivated the arbitrator to still take testimony, but how much time might that have taken? The final outcome in any deliberation can not be easily predicted or measured as is possible with finite quantifiable processes.
I wondered… what other work environments is the human interpretation element an integral part of the work? Congress, medicine, education? Can lean thinking be applied to the legal or other professional systems of work? Can careful deliberation be quantified, time limited or standardized? Can the professional judgments made by judges, lawyers, doctors, counselors or teachers be standardized? My prima facie conclusion is no. Certainly much of the administrative process can be standardized, but analyzing data from human interpersonal behavior and related biological or psychological function is subject to multiple factors and may not be easily quantified or standardized. As trained professionals gain experience their decisions come quicker as various familiar senarios appear. That timely critical analysis skill is an important factor in assessing professional competance and value. How do you measure that experience? 
That being said… I have some measurable chores to do at home today and the deliberation required to write this column is using that precious time. Hm… choice, creative activity or necessary survival tasks? Balance is the key. Have a great Saturday. 
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 07:24:58 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: My Husband the Black Belt]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/my_husband_the_black_belt.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When I first went to Six Sigma training, I was very enthusiastic about it and shared everything I learned over the dinner table with my family.  I talked about my projects and the tools, my successes and failures.  I always thought they listened politely and then forgot about it.  You know, Mom talking about work AGAIN, yada-yada-blah-blah-blah.
Then one day recently my husband came home and asked me to help him transfer some process maps into an electronic version.  With a team from his workplace, he had facilitated a current state and future state map, and then asked the team to come up with goals for the project.  They included:
- Identify opportunities for flow 
- Eliminate duplicate steps
- Standardize process
- Meet stakeholder requirements
- Ensure that accreditation requirements are met
- Develop metrics for monitoring the process long-term
Now, he had talked about doing an improvement project at work for this particular process, but I hadn't quizzed him on the details.  So I was surprised and pleased that his project incorporated so many elements of the Lean and Six Sigma methods.
"Wow, honey, that's great!" I said.  "You really learned a lot from hearing me talk about my job at the dinner table!"
"Well, not really," he replied, "it's just common sense!"
Now, while his answer was not particularly tactful, I did like it for one reason.  It made me reflect that it would be great to live in a world where utilizing process improvement tools and concepts is "just common sense!" - instead of the resistance-laden, data-poor, time-crunched activity that it sometimes is.
I'll think I'll spend a few moments in that imaginary world, before returning to the next task on my to-do list!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 15:04:08 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Boss DOE]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/boss_doe.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 10:03:44 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Being Right]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/being_right.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There are countless business books out there that present good reasons why it is not necessary to be 100% right all the time. Beyond being unnecessary, I think being completely right is highly over-rated in the context of business. Being 80% right and good at executing is probably more than sufficient in most cases. Not all cases, of course, but most. Being 50% or even 25% right and good at executing is certainly better than being 100% right and unable to execute. But clearly, this message is not getting through to the Six Sigma crowd.
I say this because the majority of philosophical conversations I hear about continuous improvement still revolve around a driving need to be right. These range from high level (Is Lean or Six Sigma the right program for this company? Have we got the right set of tools? Are our senior executives saying the right things?) to very specific (Are we doing measurement system analysis right? Do we have the right project selection process? Is our interpretation of capability indices right?). But they all rest on a common assumption that being right about the various aspects of continuous improvement is necessary.
I’ll do the 80% contingent one better and propose that being right is neither necessary nor sufficient for a continuous improvement program like Six Sigma to work. I’m not even sure it is worth worrying about.
The sufficiency clause is easier to argue, because libraries are filled with books by people that are right. Deming was right. Shewhart was right. Ishikawa was right. Juran was right. Womack is right. Wheeler is right. There are even some consultants out there who are right. Plenty of people over time have got things right. But there are still many of organizations doing it wrong, even though they’ve read all of the books and hired the consultants. So clearly being right isn’t sufficient for being successful.
There is also ample evidence that being right isn’t necessary for being successful. I’ve seen multitudinous cases where flawed methodology or assumptions were used to generate genuine process improvements. And not just by luck. There are plenty of Green Belts and Black Belts out there who misuse the statistical toolset they have been handed and still turn out great results. Same thing for Lean or any other methodology you care to mention.
Indeed, this latter phenomenon is a fixation both in the community and in the popular business press. There are plenty of detractors out there who gleefully point at holes in the methodology, highlight inappropriate shortcuts, and take pride in identifying errors. I’m tired of hearing from those people…not because they are incorrect, but because what they are correct about doesn’t matter. What those folks don’t realize is that being wrong doesn’t have much of an impact on the success of the program as a whole. Because being right is almost irrelevant.
You only have to be vaguely right – let’s say 25% for the sake of argument – to have a program that adds significant value for an organization. That’s because the real value of these programs is forging a common approach and methodology across the organization. Getting people on the same page and (to mix metaphors) marching in the same direction.
Let me put it another way. Take the usual assumptions about running a successful program. Any book, consultant, or expert will tell you that the following are needed (your list may vary):

The support of senior management
Top-notch training on the methodology
The best people assigned to the most important problems
Adequate resources, support, and budget
The focus of the organization for a sustained period of time
My point is simply this: if you manage to get all of those things in place, what you decide on as the content of the program is largely immaterial. You want to teach DMAIC? Fine. Want to make Lean your thing? Fine. Want to invent your own methodology? Fine. Want to have hula classes and a luau every Friday? Fine. It really doesn’t matter. The entire point of the program is to force the bullet points above to happen. Do whatever you have to do, call the program whatever you have to call it, just make sure those things happen. Because once they do, the rest is just details. Hula and luau can work just as well as Lean and Six Sigma.
This, ironically, is why Six Sigma has been so successful and so long-lived. Not because it is especially right - Lord knows there are holes in the philosophy and methodology you could drive a truck through. (1.5 sigma shift, anyone? CpK without control charts, anyone? I could go on…) But rather because it is very, very good at motivating the organization towards the goals described above. And that turns out to be much more important than being right.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Survey: Six Sigma Project Failure]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/survey_six_sigma_project_failure.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ iSixSigma Magazine’s latest research survey is live! 
This survey dives into the deep pool of Six Sigma project failure. What does "failure" mean? You tell us what project failure means at your company.  Is it when a Six Sigma project fails to deliver the expected improvements?  Fails to get completed, or fails to stay in control?  Once we know what failure means we’ll get into finding out the root causes for failure.
This is your chance to be heard. The survey is only 22 questions (that’s a 5 to 10 minute investment of your time).  The full results will be published in the November/December  issue of iSixSigma Magazine, and I’ll surely post the highlights here on the Blogosphere.  Thanks for your support!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:56:12 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma for the Office]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_for_the_office.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I love it when people in the office talk about what they can do to improve costs. Having said that, over the course of my career, I would say the majority of  Six Sigma office projects I’ve seen should’ve never been started in the first place.
Is there variation in the office? You bet.  Why is it one person can remember how to cancel a print job while the other waits for a novel to be printed before he realises he’s made a mistake? Why do you only need one pen when the person in the cube next to you needs eight to do the same job?
You, as many people I work with, would think the office atmosphere is ripe to reap the rewards of Six Sigma. I have seen projects geared to reduce office supplies, paper usage, color copies, shipping carriers, etc. You name it, I’ve probably seen it attempted to be done. And do you know what? The majority of the time, the projects fail. 
While the ideas have merit, it’s execution of piloting office projects that set the stage for failure. The fundamental rule of Six Sigma is to pick projects where the factors can be controlled.  When it comes to human nature in the office, it’s often very difficult to lock in changes unless you can error-proof the process (this puts the “Lean” in Lean Six Sigma).
For example, I remember a project to reduce shipment errors and costs by standardising with one company. Although the contract with the outgoing company was not renewed, its supplies were left in the mailroom only to have people continue to use them and the company charge a higher rate (because there was now no contracted discount).
Another example involved a project to reduce printing expenses.  Printers had their defaults changed to print black and white on both sides of the paper. Access to color copiers was restricted to only a few employees.  Announcements were even posted on copiers and printers.  Sounds like a success, right? Wrong. Although some of the modifications did initially post modest savings, they were offset by sales and marketing re-printing the double sided materials into a single sided format. Another issue arose when legitimate stakeholders did not have access to needed copiers. In addition to the rework involved to grant user access, a wave of discontent swept through the office.
This leads me to my next point. If you want an office project to succeed, you need to involve everyone working in the office. Any value you think you may save by standardising office supplies will be quickly lost in productivity by the individual making the rounds to whinge and moan about how he can’t write with the inferior pen that was 17 cents cheaper than the one he used to use.
Lastly, in order for an office project to be a success, an adequate control plan must be in place and communicated.  I’ve seen a project where a mini DOE on toner cartridges was conducted that clearly demonstrated the best product, only to have results overlooked because the person quit three months later and the supplier’s part number wasn’t uploaded into the ERP reorder system.
Controllable, error-proofed, customer focused and embedded. If your Six Sigma office project can’t use these words, then you may want to find another project.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Holly Hawkins]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 04:11:04 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Data Point]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_data_point.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:03:50 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Dirty Socks]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/dirty_socks.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have heard people say that once you have experienced the power of Lean Six Sigma that you will never be the same.  I can vouch for that.  Process thinking and waste elimination will begin to infiltrate every part of your life - including how you do laundry.  I never thought of laundry as a ’process’ but after watching my husband do laundry, I realized that batch processing was prevalent in our house.  Some of it I can deal with - at least the part where you collect laundry, put it through a wash cycle and load it in the dryer.  It’s the batch processing of laundry after it has dried that needed to be addressed. 
 
Here’s how my husband does it.  Once the laundry is dry, he first hangs up the shirts.  Next he unloads the remaining clean laundry in a basket and takes it upstairs where he places the basket on the floor next to the bed.  It can sit here for hours or sometimes days.  Next he picks things out of the basket and sorts them into piles on the bed (kid’s clothes, towels, etc).   Next he goes to each pile and folds the pile and stacks it on the bed.  Finally he takes the stack to the final location and either puts it away or leaves it sitting on the kid’s bed for them to put away (right - like that ever happens).   Taa-daa, the laundry is finally done. From dry to final location the laundry was batched up to four times and could take up to three days.
Being the process excellence zealot that I am, I advised him that changing his process to incorporate the concept of "one-piece-flow" would be much more efficient.  For example, here’s my process.  Get an item out of the dryer fold it and put it in the basket organized by where it needs to go.  When complete, walk the basket up the back stairs making stops along the way - putting things in their place.  I have cut the process down to one batch and have achieved a cycle time of 12 minutes.  
After my husband told me what I could do with my ’one-piece-flow’, he proceeded to batch the laundry.  So what are the lessons learned?
1.  One-piece-flow can drastically reduce cycle time
2.  Cultural change is at the root of all efficiency gains
3.  Batch processing is still better than having dirty socks!
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 05:50:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Save $700 With iSixSigma Live Pre-Agenda Rate]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/save_700_with_isixsigma_live_pre_agenda_rate.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You already know that the iSixSigma community is strong -- over 500,000. You may have heard that we’ve launched a conference division. What you may not have heard is that our upcoming January conference will be unlike any other you have attended. Outstanding content. Prestigious keynotes. Unrivaled networking and community. Register today to get your ticket to the "must-attend" Lean Six Sigma leadership event of the year and save up to $700.00.
All Access Pass holders will receive:

Three and a half days of cutting-edge sessions, keynotes and Q&amp;A time for deep discussions.
A comfortable, intimate setting that promotes networking with speakers and fellow conference participants.
Access to all speaker presentations, including worksheets, PowerPoints and other session materials.
All conference meal functions and refreshment breaks.
Access to our two evening networking receptions, and the classic car museum tour.
Access to our Solutions Pavilion and Learning Sessions, showcasing the products and services that will drive your business growth.
Best practices for deploying and implementing Lean Six Sigma at any organizational maturity level. 
You can register with confidence...here’s why:

Our reputation: The iSixSigma Live programming team includes the sharpest minds in Six Sigma. Together, iSixSigma Founder Michael Cyger and CSSBB Director of Events Jeannine Hall have moderated Six Sigma discussions, published on luminaries and educated generations of Six Sigma professionals. They bring with them the full support of iSixSigma.com and iSixSigma Magazine editors, research manager and program managers.
Our mission: iSixSigma was founded by successful Six Sigma professionals from corporate America. We understand how businesses run. And we understand the role that Six Sigma must play. Our mission is to help corporations run smarter, faster and cheaper using Six Sigma. We are invested in the success of our readers and conference attendees.
Our history: We have been fostering community, connecting a network of individuals and educating Six Sigma professionals around the world since 2000. Our core competency is content. While others may have been producing conferences for almost as long, our conferences will be different. We have designed them from the ground-up with real attendee VOC and CTQs.
Be recognized for your breakthrough results: As part of the iSixSigma Live! Summit and Awards, iSixSigma will recognize companies and individuals who have successfully achieved breakthrough results. Finalists will be given an opportunity to showcase their project/deployment in front of 300 Lean Six Sigma practitioners from around the world. 
Award categories include:

iSixSigma’s Six Sigma Hall of Fame
iSixSigma’s Best Places to Work 
Largest Breakthrough Improvement Projects 
Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program
Deadlines to enter are coming up! For more information on award categories and entry requirements, visit: http://live.isixsigma.com/awards/default.html.  Register or call 1.877.474.9744Don’t delay. Sign up today at the pre-agenda rate and take advantage of huge savings.
Register Today -- You will be confident with your decision! ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:13:19 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Sensei Certification?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/sensei_certification.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A lot of my conversations recently have centered around certification for lean.  Coming from colleagues who started in Six Sigma as a Green Belt or Black Belt, it seems "natural" that when you add lean facilitation to your skills, you could get certified in lean, too.
But, as I understand it, the traditional path for lean practitioners has been based more on experience and expertise than certification.  The concept of taking a test and getting certified as a lean leader seems not to fit the philosophy as I have learned it (so far!)
Is there a move to create a lean certification, either for facilitators or senseis, similar to the Green Belt / Black Belt / Master Black Belt model?  If so, does it require a project as part of the certification?  And, what is the title that you end up with?
I know there are "lean facilitator" certificates offered by a variety of universities and vendors.  I've even seen an ad for "Lean Six Sigma Sensei" certification.  How about "Lean Greenbelt, Lean Blackbelt, and Lean Masterblackbelt?"  "Lean Expert?"
I'm also starting to see classified ads for positions that read "Master Black Belt / Lean Sensei certification required."
So is there a new push for "Sensei certification?"  Or is that just wishful thinking on the part of people who like to collect letters after their names?Inquiring minds want to know!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:53:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Erie County Scouting Six Sigma Talent]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/erie_county_scouting_six_sigma_talent.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Al Hammonds has been appointed the new Deputy County Executive, which means Erie County is looking for a new Director of Six Sigma.  


“A new director for the Six Sigma program will be chosen within the next three to four weeks, Collins said. The hope is that the new hire will be easier to find than Hammonds was.”
As for Al…“he’s excited about the opportunity to continue implementing Six Sigma business practices within county departments.”

“Beginning to implement Six Sigma in Erie County government has been one of the most challenging, yet rewarding jobs of my career,” said Hammonds.  “I will approach my new responsibilities with the same excitement and drive.”  
Anyone interested in leading the Six Sigma initiative in Erie County, get that resume in.  
Collins appoints new deputy county executive, Tonowanda News, July 8, 2008
Hammonds Named Deputy County Executive, WNYmedia.net, July 7, 2008]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:58:02 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Accepting Award Nominations]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_accepting_award_nominations.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Breaking news...iSixSigma Live! Summit and Awards is now accepting award nominations.  That’s right.  You can nominate people, companies and projects for one of the many award categories:

Six Sigma Hall of Fame 
Best Places to Work 
Most Successful Lean Six Sigma Start-up or Re-energized Lean Six Sigma Program  
Largest-Breakthrough Improvement Projects (in eight categories)  
Additionally there is a People’s Choice Award  where iSixSigma readers get to decide the winners of the breakthrough improvement projects.  And finally, the iSixSigma MVP Awards.These awards will be presented to individuals that have made outstanding voluntary contributions to the Six Sigma community through the iSixSigma discussion forum and Blogosphere.  
The details for each award can be found at http://live.isixsigma.com/awards/default.html 
Now get nominating!  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:33:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Take me out to the Gemba]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/take_me_out_to_the_gemba.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[By popular demand, words to an old favorite tune that you can use while watching the Major League Baseball All-Star Game, at the Seventh-Inning Stretch:
Take me out to the Gemba
Take me out to the flow!
Find me a Value Stream I can track
I don't want waste to ever come back!
For it's root, root, root out the defects,
Reduce variation even more,
For it's 1-2-3-4-5-6 Sigma we want
On the old shop floor!
 
(With apologies to Jack Norworth who wrote the original words in 1908, and with thanks to Albert Von Tilzer who wrote the tune!)
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:35:41 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Voices]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/voices.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store! | Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 09:49:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean; Your Proverbial ‘Boot In The Door’]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_your_proverbial_boot_in_the_door.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have recently completed a ‘Five S’ (see isixsigma dictionary) on a materials procurement process, and have had the most buy in this year for process improvement. Why?

Because especially ‘Sort’ is simple for all to understand, it’s basically an organised spring clean
You leave your FIRST meeting with a plan of action that can be executed within days, this often takes longer with DMAIC
Because the results are visual. Always take before and after photos
Once you have this win and have been seen to deliver, you can start putting more intricate process improvement methods in place like Value Stream Mapping, data collection etc without your stakeholders noticing or even better with their consent.
 
I am interested in your experiences and first impressions of deploying Lean ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[J P Spencer]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:14:35 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Getting a Clue with Queuing Theory]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/getting_a_clue_with_queuing_theory.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I often find real world examples of process "improvements" staring me blatantly in the face.  For example, I stumbled upon queuing theory in action at the local movie theatre. 
Queuing theory is the study of how lines (or queues) are formed and dissipate over time.  Examples of queues are everywhere: traffic at an intersection, restaurant lines during the lunch hour rush, dialling into a call center, etc.  Queuing theory is a tool in the Lean Six Sigma toolkit. It aims reducing bottlenecks which contribute to time spent waiting in line (or in some cases, eliminating wait time completely).
Anyway, back to my experience at the move theatre…When I purchased tickets, I was asked if I wanted to sit in the front, middle, or back. I, like most of those attending the movie, chose the middle section. To my amazement, the ticket printed out an exact row and seat number (similar to what you would see on an airline ticket).As I took my seat, I saw how the rows in front of me and behind me suddenly filled up.
I can see where queuing theory could benefit the theatre from an efficiency and error proofing perspective.  The computer knows exactly how many seats have been allocated to what movie and where in the screening room; a process that can assist in reducing the chance people from sneaking in to see an additional movie.  In the movie I saw, occupied seating was concentrated to about 20% of the room, reducing clean up time for employees.
Although queuing might be efficient, is it always effective? In my case, the answer is no. Sure, I got to sit in the mid section as I requested. The saying “Be careful what you wish for” came to mind as I was surrounded in every imaginable direction by people. Given the option, I would have rather sat closer to (or even further away) from the screen if it meant I wasn’t breathing on top of the other movie goers. Further, if my husband and I had arrived a bit later and unknowingly requested middle seating, it is unlikely we would’ve been able to sit next to each other- a definite detractor of service. 
There are many applications where queuing has been successful such as automated computer screens which direct you to the next available bank clerk, checkout line, etc., however under these conditions most customers assume there won’t be a significant difference in their experience.  But when there are multiple factors critical to quality (or in this case customer satisfaction), foregoing the voice of the customer can actually decrease customer satisfaction.  The key here is being efficient and effective. A good Lean Six Sigma project will weigh voice of the customer or Kano analysis alongside forecasted cycle time improvements and determine what the net effect is prior to implementing a solution.  If customer dissatisfaction outweighs process improvements, then your customers, if given a choice, will be less likely to purchase your products or services. In my case, I think I’ll be selecting a different theatre next time. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Holly Hawkins]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 22:32:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Cargo Cults]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/cargo_cults.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I can’t remember the first time I head the concept of a “Cargo Cult” used as a business analogy. But I can recall thinking that it was a powerful way to explain the dangers of throwing money and resources around trying to duplicate what another company had done without really taking the time to understand exactly what they did and why they did it. There were obvious applications to Six Sigma deployments in particular, since Six Sigma is rife with rituals and jargon.
And I was right. It was very effective. So I used the analogy in conversation, in training, and during presentations with great frequency for quite a while. Others were out there doing the same. At some point I became convinced that everyone in the world must have heard the story. Plus, I’m not a big fan of making arguments by analogy because you open yourself up to a simple, but devastating criticism. So for the past few years I stopped talking about Cargo Cults.
Then, the other day, I brought the Cargo Cult idea up in conversation again. To my surprise, no one around the table had heard of it, and they all reacted enthusiastically. I admit the possibility that the crowd was just being polite, but on the other hand maybe it’s time to polish this chestnut and put it back on display. If you’ve heard it a million times, you can stop reading now. If you haven’t…
I’m not sure if he was the first to do so, but Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman eloquently described Cargo Cults it in his 1974 Commencement Address at CalTech as an evocation of science done badly:

"In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they've arranged to make things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head to headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas--he's the controller--and they wait for the airplanes to land. They're doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn't work. No airplanes land."
The entire speech is available here if you want Feynman's context, but it's not essential to the story.
An interesting fact (but also not essential) is that Cargo Cults are real. Wikipedia has some history, and also makes the following point:

"From time to time, the term 'cargo cult' is invoked as an English language idiom, to mean any group of people who imitate the superficial exterior of a process or system without having any understanding of the underlying substance."
If you’ve ever worked on a Six Sigma deployment, this has to sound familiar. How many deployments were launched simply “because GE did it”? And how many deployment were launched just like GE did it? I’m not knocking GE – quite the opposite. But for some other organization to simply mimic what GE did in an attempt to achieve the same results they did is the worst kind of Cargo Cult behavior. Still, it happens all the time, and is still happening to this day. And as detractors are fond of pointing out, the planes don’t land.
The power of this analogy arises for three reasons. First, the Cargo Cult story is fun and very easy to tell. Second, the link between Cargo Cults and Continuous Improvements deployments is easy to recognize. And third, there are so many botched deployments out there falling prey to the fallacy of Cargo Cult thinking that your audience will immediately start nodding their heads if you bring it up in conversation.
So, there you have it: the Cargo Cult analogy. Stifle a yawn if you’ve heard it too many times before, but try it out on your friends if you haven’t. It can be strecthed and pulled in a hundred directions to illuminate a hundred different points. Unfortunately, using it to talk about Six Sigma deployments doesn't require much stretching at all.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Best Place to Work]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/the_best_place_to_work.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Do you work for a great Six Sigma company?  If you think your company is one of the best places for Six Sigma folks to work, nominate them to participate in iSixSigma’s Best Places to Work competition.  
In a nutshell, we’re looking for places (companies, government organizations, associations, nonprofits) that:  
    * Foster a supportive culture for Six Sigma    * Develop their Six Sigma talent through leadership and other training    * Offer career advancement opportunities for Six Sigma alumni    * Provide competitive pay, and excellent rewards and recognition
For all the details on the competition visit:http://live.isixsigma.com/awards/bestplacestowork.html 
After you’ve read up on the eligibility requirements and rules, then go ahead and nominate a company that you think fits the bill.
Nominations are already starting to pour in.  Spread the word. Don’t let your company be the best place to work that no one knows about!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:10:45 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The  Lean Six Sigma All-Star Game]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_lean_six_sigma_all_star_game.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As you may know, if you're a baseball fan, Major League Baseball is holding its All-Star Game on July 15 at Yankee Stadium.
You may also know that you can create your own "fantasy" baseball team, on-line, by selecting players and assigning them to your team.  Then, as the statistics build up week after week, the organizers compile the results and figure out who has the best team roster and therefore the best record in stats and games won.
Now, I think we could have a kind of fantasy all-star game of our own, based on outstanding Lean and Six Sigma accomplishments.  What do you think?
THE STARTING LINE-UP
1 Pitcher:  Taiichi Ohno
2 Catcher:  Shigeo Shingo
3 First Base:  Eiji Toyoda
4 Second Base:  Sakichi Toyoda
5 Third Base: Kiichro Toyoda
6 Shortstop:  Genichi Taguchi
7 Left Field:  Bill Smith
8 Center Field:  Jack Welch
9 Right Field:  Bob Galvin
Designated Hitter:  Henry Ford
Manager:  W, Edwards Deming
I'd be interested in hearing whether you'd like any other "team members" to play on your all-star roster!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;History&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:17:43 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Think]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/think.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:25:27 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Return to Sender]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/return_to_sender.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
In 1660 King Charles 2nd officially established the General Post Office by act of parliament. In 1840 the first adhesive stamp, the penny black, was introduced. There's a fair degree more history I skipped because I want to talk about a recent innovation.
Pricing in Proportion was launched on the poor unsuspecting customer in 2006 . This changed postage prices from being based solely on weight to being based on weight and letter dimensions. Here is the gauge that is installed at post offices to determine the price band for your letter. If your letter is more than 5mm (0.2 inch) then it costs more.

It’s a long trip to the post office and its easy to make a mistake so I tend to put extra stamps on letters to be sure it will get to the destination. What an imaginative revenue opportunity.
But it’s the rework process that really jars with me. If a letter is sent with insufficient postage it’s the recipient who is asked to pay the additional postage plus an administration fee. If you don’t pay you don’t get your letter and you have no way of knowing what you’re paying for. I wouldn’t mind too much except this happens quite regularly with the most common cause being the kid’s birthday cards with badges on the front.
This change has introduced additional complexity and to get around this people like me are regularly over-paying to avoid the risk. So the question is, “what poka-yoke device would sort this out?”]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:35:18 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Educational]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/educational.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I had the privilege recently of helping to teach lean to a group of university leaders.  I had great fun assisting with the first day of class, when we introduced basic lean concepts.  However, when my instructing partner and I looked at our plus-deltas from the day (comments about what the participants valued, and what we should change), there were some sticky-notes saying "too much material" and "went too fast" and "too much to remember."  Even though we had paced the day rather slowly, as I thought, it caused us to wonder whether we needed to restructure the day - or had we just not taught effectively?
On the second day, we got into Value Stream Mapping.  As we went through the material, topics from Day 1 kept popping up, as you would expect.  By repeating the concepts and giving specific, education-based examples, we were able to build a lot of momentum around the purpose and usefulness of Value Stream Mapping.  The plus-deltas on Day 2 showed that most people enjoyed putting the concepts to work around real-life examples.
By Day 3, when we used examples of frustrating processes to create Future State maps, the group was in full swing.  They were coming up with so many ideas to remove waste and reduce delays and hand-offs, that we were hard-pressed to keep them from going right out and implementing their suggestions.  ("Wait, you don't have enough feedback from the front-line workers yet!!!  Remember, it's JUST an exercise!!!")  The evaluation included many "plusses" and only a few "deltas."
What made the difference?  We introduced just as many new concepts the first day as we did the second and the third.  But by incorporating the tools that we'd already introduced, as we brought up new ones, we gave the group practice in "trying on" the lean approach in different ways, and finally we let them loose on real-life examples.
This experience made it clear to me that I shouldn't be judgmental when people need to hear things more than once, in order to incorporate and integrate the concepts.  I've seen many learners become anxious when they're overwhelmed with new terminology; but on the other hand, there are always some "drivers" in the audience who aren't satisfied unless you're covering each slide in about 30 seconds.  It's interesting that each group seems to have its own pace of learning.  In the educators' group, we may have gone a little too fast at first, but then they hit their stride on the second and third days.  It was fun to watch the light bulbs turn on and the enthusiasm kick in!
As usual, for every day that I'm giving instruction, I learn just about as much as I teach.  Hooray for the educational process!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:18:49 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma meets IT at McKesson]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_meets_it_at_mckesson.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Last Week, Ben Worthen, of The Wall Street Journal, interviewed Randall Spratt, chief information officer at McKesson Corp.  McKesson was one of the pioneer healthcare companies to use Six Sigma, starting in 1999 and still going strong today.  
In the interview Spratt talked about how the use of Six Sigma and technology are making operations more efficient. He first gave the quick Six Sigma spiel and then went on to share an example where a Six Sigma project led to a technology based solution to a warehousing problem: 

WSJ: One technology that McKesson developed is a small computer that warehouse workers wear on their wrists and that is attached to a scanner on the worker's finger. How did you come up with this system and what has it accomplished?
MR. SPRATT: It came from a Six Sigma analysis. Most errors in the warehouse came at the point of picking, which is taking something off a warehouse shelf, associating it with an order, and putting it in the right bin for shipping. The second-highest error rate came from stocking errors. If you stock a drug in the wrong place, the pickers have to search for it and they waste a lot of time. So they sat down and said how can we solve these problems.
This is classic Six Sigma meets Innovation.  Analysis reveals where the problems are and then innovators develop a solution to the problem, Six Sigma makes sure the new innovative system stays in control. And who says Six Sigma and innovation don’t get along? 
The interview is great read for all Six Sigma practitioners, and especially for the healthcare IT professional.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Healthcare&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2008 13:08:21 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Malaysia's fuel price hike]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/malaysias_fuel_price_hike.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Last Thursday, 5th June, the Malaysian Government revamped its petrol subsidy system by increasing petrol prices by a steep 41%, from USD0.58 (RM1.92) a liter to USD0.83 (RM2.70). It is low if you guys look at it in US currency, but in Malaysian Ringgit terms it’s a spike in cost of living. Public expectation here is low petrol prices because Malaysia is an oil-producing country. Petrol in Venuezela, by the way, is USD0.05 per litre.
This price hike caused the following to happen in chain-effect:
• Transportation companies announced increases of 35% in trucking and logistic fees (now it’s increased to 40-45%)• Petronas announced gas price increase by 187%• Electricity rates increased 18-26% for commercial and small businesses• Kuala Lumpur stock exchange fell 27 points the next day the price hike was announced• An island-state said that low-cost housing was no longer possible in anticipation of rising building materials cost• Other Government-price-controlled food items such chicken had their ceiling price removed
The main argument for the fuel price increase is that the heavy government subsidies eat into the economy pie and that the Malaysian fuel subsidies flows to its neighbors Thailand and Singapore (in a limited way)- Thailand and Singaporean vehicle traffic into Malaysia is estimated to be above 200,000 vehicles a day across the Thai-Malaysian and Singapore-Malaysia borders. The Thailand and Singapore cars fill-up before leaving for home. Singaporeans are allowed only a three-quarter full gas tank as their vehicles cross the border.
Goldman Sachs estimates a 7% inflation for June while local financial institutions forecast a 5-6% inflation for the whole of 2008, a ten-year high. There are immediate mitigation steps undertaken by the government of course, such as a USD191 and USD46 per annum rebate for small car and bike owners respectively. However, there are huge gaps in the process- people who do not own vehicles are missed out in the picture, left alone to combat inflation. 
The Malaysian Government is expected to realize USD12.23 (RM40) billion in the subsidy cuts this year. With the savings there promises of improving and expanding the public transport system and other public-beneficial programmes. Citizens take this fuel price hike from a political viewpoint as well as the economics of it. There is high suspicion on the utilization of subsidy savings- where is the Government channeling the additional petro-dollars from the realized savings to. Another prolonged fury- the financial statements of Petronas are not made public by law since many years back. 
Public expectation is on the Malaysian Government to improve the public transport infrastructure which they have promised to do but still dragging their feet on it. Yes, the public feels left alone. Public transport is important so we can all leave our cars at home and start using a cheaper means of transport. Meantime, the Malaysian Government slashes RM2 billion of its ministers’ entertainment allowances and promises no further fuel price hikes this year. Pullback in government spending has its effects on the economy, as we know the theory of macroeconomics explains it. The first blood drawn will be on Malaysia’s retail and hotel sector because the entertainment cut affects government seminars and events … the reduction in government spending will result in a contraction and loss of jobs in both industries eventually. 
But frankly everyone hopes this situation does not arrive. Being worked in the hotel industry previously- in times of falling operating profit, the only immediate controllable remedy is to cut and reduce operating expenses. However 4-5 star hotel operators know that cutting costs has a limit before it impacts on guests’ experience. I was lucky to have Six Sigma when trouble hit my hotel in 2003. That year SARs arrived and it hit the hotel industry hard (imagine a hotel having an average occupancy of 90% going down to 8% for three months)- for starters my colleagues and I (senior management) voluntered a 25% pay-cut to immediately reduce costs. Six Sigma was just launched in the Asia-Pacific region and the team quickly hit the boardroom and flipcharts to identify revenue-enhancing and cost reduction lean projects. I particularly championed a laundry project and an electricity reduction program. Six Sigma tools such as process mapping, the CTQ diagram and VOC helped identified critical process areas which mattered to our guests most. Those areas were treated with extreme care if there was a particular cost reduction. We sold our laundry services to nearby hotels; staggered group check-ins and planned chiller starts on half-hour intervals to avoid the triggering the higher band electricity rate and so on. SARs lasted till the end of the second quarter of 2003. Despite of this, the hotel went on to achieve 125% of its budgeted gross operating profit by the end of 2003; increased short term investments to USD4 million, and the paycuts never flowed down to the other managers and staff. I can frankly say that without the timely appearance of Six Sigma in Asia-Pacific at that time, the drastic cost-reduction my hotel took would have been more damaging to the business. 
That’s Six Sigma for you- tested in times of financial turmoil.
Quickfacts
Currency USD1~RM3.27 at time of writing
Per capita (estimated) 2007 USA USD46,000; Malaysia USD14,400
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Vincent Chin]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:49:17 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Leadership: Right tools, Centered source]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/leadership_right_tools_centered_source.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Tools are wonderful. Have you ever tried to unscrew a Phillips head screw with a wrench?  Of course not.  The right tool is critical to the job.  Six Sigma tools are a wonderful technological advance that can transform an organization when used in the correct context.  This is undisputable. Resistance is futile.  But the ability to choose and implement the best change tool or process is not the only factor we must look for in leaders.  Certainly their analysis and skill in choosing the best tool for the situation is critical, but again this is not the end of the story.   There is another factor that in most cases will assure success of the goal.  
C. Otto Scharmer discusses this factor in an article called Uncovering the Blind Spot of Leadership.  He asks readers to question the source of the leader.  He suggests 4 kinds of listening which describe how leaders and others listen to team members when group problem solving is occurring.  Generative listening is the most effective of the four kinds because, “This level of listening requires us to access our open will—our capacity to connect to the highest future possibility that can emerge.” 
When the leader and group members are listening from this place transformation and new visions are created from the group which can then be planned and implemented for the good of the organization.  
I encourage all  Six Sigma practitioners and leaders to check this article out.  I plan to read his book on Theory U which outlines more in depth the author’s thinking on organizational development.  I think it will give leaders and others who want to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem some excellent perspective.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:07:26 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Pareto Charts]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/pareto_charts.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:47:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma - The Real Deal]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_the_real_deal.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Deploy - Integrate - Sustain - Institutionalize.  Although each phase has distinct qualities, the lines between them are blurred or almost seamless - as it should be.    I’m often asked what I think "institutionalization" looks like.  My response:  "Unconscious application".  By that, I don’t mean asleep at the wheel.   When addressing an audience I typically use the following example to describe the state of "Unconscious Application."
Let’s say that you are working in an office and need to send some information across town.  How do you do it?  Immediately I get responses like "e-mail" or "fax."    Exactly, I reply.  I then ask the audience "How many of you thought about printing the document, stuffing it in an envelope, adding a stamp and putting it in the US mail?"  People look at me like I’m nuts.  And so the point is made.  No one even thinks in those terms anymore.  Even when a signature is required, we sign, scan and move the document along electronically.   That’s Unconscious Application and that’s what it means to make Six Sigma "the way you work" or have it in "your DNA".  It means that when you have a tough problem to solve, you wouldn’t think of using anything besides Six Sigma to find the answer.  
Getting there is not an overnight journey.   But knowing when you’ve personally made the hyper-leap to "institutionalize" from "sustain" may occur in an instant.  It is when you get a report with bar charts and ask the author to present your data in box-plot charts so that you can better understand the variance.  Once you get there you will never go back  . . . and that’s the "Real Deal!"]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 04:24:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Looking for Inspiration]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/looking_for_inspiration.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Our Lean Manufacturing program is stepping-up a gear and as part of this we are looking to present the approach to a large audience of about 200 people. And I am looking for some inspiration.
If anyone has a good ice-breaker, simulation, case study or other activity that would take about 30 minutes and engage a large audience then please let me know.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 14:49:04 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Do the Public Policy Guru's get it?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/do_the_public_policy_gurus_get_it.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lean government is making public sector inroads through out the US.  It is exciting to see this.  But I am worried.  Some managers seem to see it as a weapon, rather than a tool.   “The legislature is making us more accountable so we have to do something or else”.   “Do more with less”.  “Cut staff so we can lower the budget”.  These attitudes have nothing to do with lean government and everything to do with poor public policy. 
It is important for Lean process analysis to gain some better more understandable public recognition.  This needs to be done by not only the Champions, and Managers but more importantly practitioners who understand public policy language.  The facts show that lean process analysis and implementation can make a difference between a well run efficient and value laden government service and a wasteful bureaucratic mess. 
Are any candidates listening?
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 May 2008 05:09:53 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Numb3rs]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/numb3rs.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You don't have to read much of the daily paper, in the US at least, to see data presented in very interesting ways.
"Gas price SKYROCKETS to $4 a gallon!"
"The Dow Jones Industrial Average PLUMMETS to 12,500!"
"Pistons [Basketball Team] Have the EDGE Now!"
"Kid Obesity Rate STEADY"
Now, part of the reason for this hyperbole is that exciting headlines get more people to buy the paper, and so you may think that the exaggeration is just a way to get people to read the accompanying story.
But when you look more closely, the gas price moved from $3.97 the week before; the DJIA had been 12,600 on the previous day, the Pistons were tied 2-2 with the Celtics, and buried in the paragraph about the kids was this statement:  "...it's too soon to know if this really means we're beginning to make meaningful inroads... it may simply be a statistical fluke."
Well, that puts a little different spin on the headlines.  I worry about this for two main reasons.  First, we are all at the mercy of first impressions, and while newspapers need to sell, they sometimes do it by presenting data in a way that is easy to get alarmed over, but not easy to understand (as we project engineers would understand it).  Now, no one expects to see or hear detailed information on how the data was collected, or how the sample size was calculated.  But how many people read the full story in depth?  At least, we should train ourselves (and our kids) to realize when data is being presented as a teaser for the story.  As I put it in my Lean Six Sigma class, "What questions should you ask about how this data was collected?"
The other reason that I worry is that the math that my kids were taught, in their suburban-Detroit high school, had very little to do with real life; they could figure cosines and vectors and the slope of a line, but not how to figure whether a drop of 12,600 to 12,500 was cataclysmic.  I for one would eliminate geometry in favor of a statistics class - including statistical process control, presented with real-life scenarios.  Then readers and viewers and listeners could have an idea about whether data was being presented in a rational way by the news media.
What do you think?  Is data presented in the news in an ALARMING fashion???
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 10:05:08 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Hard Reality]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/hard_reality.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Adam Smith Institute has set June 2nd as UK Tax Freedom Day. This means we spend more than 5 months each year working for the government. How do we spend what’s left? Our gasoline is currently £1.23 per litre (that’s $9.15 a US gallon). If you avoid the car then our train prices are the highest in Europe. The cost of living is surging with increases coming in daily across the board. Set this against a falling housing market and a credit squeeze and people are stopping or delaying spending.
Accordingly business confidence has dropped dramatically. Unless you are in a hot, experiential market, e.g. iPhone, Indiana Jones or Wii, adapting to this challenging environment of lower growth, rising prices &amp; chasing revenue will mean an even greater focus on cash flow and controlling costs.
With high capital expenditure projects such as new IT systems unlikely to get sign-off, does this offer a great opportunity to really focus on customers, processes and removing the hidden waste? To do so immediately and relatively cheaply? To start banking benefits within weeks? To build into a full business transformation? 
As price starts to rank as the top criteria for buying decisions, so businesses will need to ensure they can reduce costs and maintain quality. Now must be the time to be ramping-up &amp; investing in the Lean Six Sigma technology.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 16:41:54 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Disclaimer]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_disclaimer.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  |  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 10:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Simplicity]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/simplicity.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was recently perusing Time magazines “Top 100” list for 2008, and came across this entry for Peter Pronovost. I had never heard of Pronovost. Here’s part of what profiler Kathleen Kingsbury had to say about him:

“A critical-care researcher at Johns Hopkins University, Pronovost may have saved more lives than any laboratory scientist in the past decade by relying on a wonderfully simple tool…”
I know what you’re are thinking, but no, Six Sigma is not the tool. Before I tell you what it is, consider that after implementing it in hospital ICUs in Michigan, hospital-acquired infections dropped from 2.7 per 1,000 patients to zero. That means more than 1,500 lives were saved in the first 18 months.
So what is this ingenious invention? What critical breakthrough occurred? What fancy bit of science and statistics produced these stupendous results? Which process improvement methodology was put to work? 
A checklist.
That’s right, Pronovost provided physicians with a list of steps as a reminding them how to complete routine procedures. 1500 lives were saved over 18 months in one state by writing down the steps for procedures, photocopying them, and handing them out. Pronovost estimates he could roll his system out across the entire US for three million dollars. Which, I think it’s worth noting, might be comparable to the annual budget for a corporate Six Sigma deployment in bigger companies.
One of the reasons I was so captivated by this story is that more and more, I find myself returning to the basics and fundamentals of process improvement methodology. I read the primary literature and wonder at the complexity of current process improvement methodology. I wonder where the power of elegance of simplicity has gone.
For example, one of my favorite books is Kaoru Ishikawa’s “Guide to Quality Control”. It’s long out of print, but you can still pick up used copies online and elsewhere. You might not know Ishikawa by name, but if you’ve ever done a fishbone diagram, you know his work. He introduced his now-eponymous diagram along with six other quality tools in the Guide. Each was elegant and simple. Things like check sheets, Pareto charts, scatter plots, basic control charts - simple tools explained concisely. It’s a slim volume, but everything is there. Every time I read it, I wonder to myself how on earth we’ve allowed the continuous improvement world to become so complex and unapproachable. I’m at a loss to explain what value Six Sigma and similar methodologies add to Ishikawa’s approach. Sure, they provide the sizzle that sells programs to organizations, but it’s quite possible that that’s all they do. Which is worrisome.
Ishikawa and Pronovost have proven that very clear and simple approaches can yield stunning results. Much as Deming and others did before them. Modern Six Sigma is anything but simple. Most Black Belts take four week to train. But I can get through Ishikawa on a flight from Chicago to Denver, and I’m guessing Pronovost can train his folks in about five minutes.
Have we taken a wrong turn?]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;History&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Picking Fruit the Six Sigma Way]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/picking_fruit_the_six_sigma_way.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Any seasoned Lean Six Sigma professional can tell you about the fruit tree of quality.  At the bottom of the tree there is fruit festering on the ground which represents “just do it” kaizen and bare bones problem solving. As you move up the tree, you can begin to pick the low hanging fruit by utilising Lean tools with a sprinkling of Six Sigma. The middle of the tree signifies Six Sigma in its unadulterated form- this is where you break out the statistics and you can reap big savings as a result. Lastly, fruit residing in the top echelon of the tree can only be picked via robust design (i.e. Design for Six Sigma). 
Many of you (including myself) were involved in Six Sigma deployments that began nearly a decade ago.  In my case, the tree was there but the expectation was to use Six Sigma to harvest all of the fruit, with little regard to Lean or other quality methodologies.  Because there was so much fruit, Black Belts had high expectations for cumulative project values and in some instances projects could be completed within a matter of weeks.
In my case after about five years of utilizing Six Sigma, solutions had been implemented for many major problems and some within the organization were questioning the validity of continuing Black Belt roles on a full time basis. Robust projects utilizing trials and Design for Six Sigma work tended to take longer than the average Six Sigma project. Value for work was moving from black and white hard dollar savings to a more abstract value. 
Does any of this sound familiar to you? One of the key concerns for a mature Six Sigma organization is the point where it feels it is squeezing a lemon that’s out of juice.  If you feel this scenario applies to you, I’d like to recommend the following advice.

Complacency is not an option. The processes you have now, no matter the sigma level, will unlikely be considered competitive ten years from now (and this applies to everything from software system design to manufacturing processes). When you pick fruit, it can grow back and when this occurs, it is never quite identical to its predecessor. Most things change over time and with that mindset, Six Sigma can take a proactive (and not reactive) approach to problem solving. 
You don’t always have to pick the tree in an upward motion. Sure, it’s great to be a Black Belt who can claim a million dollar savings on a single project, however the more mature an organization is utilizing Six Sigma, the more elusive this type of fruit becomes.  Yes, you may still be able to find value, however you may have to look down the tree. This is especially true in organizations where Six Sigma was implemented prior to Lean Manufacturing. Rather than picking a single, large piece of fruit, you may need to pick several smaller ones to equal the rewards.  The projects can be grouped in a cluster around a common problem. You may also need to expand the traditional Six Sigma project team to include additional improvement practitioners from Lean and other disciplines such as capital.
Establish a cost pool to draw from. One of the tasks when defining a Six Sigma project is to estimate a financial value to justify the project. The ripest fruit in the middle of the tree is generally linked to hard value such as added production, reduction in headcount, etc. and can very easily be calculated.  Move in either direction and the value of the fruit becomes more abstract.  I have seen some corporations where these projects can be worked with a “soft savings” undertone, meaning there is an inherent value that is understood to be good for the business but may be difficult to quantify. However, if you work for a company that must show a financial impact to the bottom line, my recommendation is to establish a Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ) or Cost of Non Conformance (CONC) metric. These metrics can be individual for department or a single value for the entire site.  Rather than focusing on how much a single project will achieve in value, the metric value can be tracked on a monthly basis to compare performance with the prior year’s costs.  For example, while working a project to reduce staff turnover may be difficult to financially validate (especially in a short timeframe), the work can feed into reducing COPQ costs for Human Resources which may include things such as relocation expense for new employees, costs for processing exit interviews, etc.
As I noted earlier, when you pick fruit off a tree, it can grow back. It may grow in a different location or may be slightly different in appearance, however it doesn’t necessarily mean prior Six Sigma work was unsuccessful. As a Six Sigma practitioner, your role is to continue picking the fruit. This may mean searching both up and down the tree. You may need to get others to help you collect it and you may also need to utilise additional tools for harvesting. You may even need to incorporate a new method to store its value. Just remember- as long as there is fruit on the tree of quality, there will always be a need for Six Sigma within organizations.

 
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Holly Hawkins]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 18:18:17 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Great Discovery, Mikel Harry]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/the_great_discovery_mikel_harry.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[2008 ISSSP Leadership Conference, Day One
A few quotes and thoughts from Michael Harry’s presentation, The Great Discovery.
What is your life dream? Have we lost the dream in Six Sigma? The power of dreams is unbelievable. Belief in a dream united Motorola. That dream was Six Sigma.
Six Sigma Timeline:1980s: Quality Improvement1990s: Cost reduction2000s: Value creation2010s: Personal achievement
At Six Sigma corporations between two and five percent of employees are involved with Six Sigma.  Mikel asks, “What about the other 95 percent?”  Empowering the masses is the future of Six Sigma.  
The great discovery is a Six Sigma way of reasoning that will empower you to innovate and execute higher quality solutions for your:

Personal Life
Home Life
Work Life
It was developed after looking back at 20 years of successful Six Sigma deployment data. The Great Discovery is about teaching people in all stages of life (even kids) how to achieve their dreams by working towards them in a systematic, planned way.
Do the dreaming * Dream the doing * Plan the doing * Do the plan]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 17:37:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: David Wickersham, President and COO Seagate]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/david_wickersham_president_and_coo_seagate.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[2008 ISSSP Leadership Conference, Day One
“Best practices need to continue to improve.”
David’s presentation covered the Seagate Business Excellence Journey over the past 10 years highlighting some of the things they’ve learned.
One of the best practices David is particularly proud of is the training curriculum.  They have gone from traditional classroom training over a four week period to a hybrid blended approach of classroom complemented with eLearning over a three week period. Even more unique is he specialty training.  All belts are all trained in a core set of Lean and Six Sigma principles and tools.  Then they either go on to operational fundamentals or transactional fundamentals.  After that they get to specialize further in their respective fields.  A brilliant innovation for training.  The college approach.  
The next best practice they developed is the career path for business excellence employees.  Business Excellence employees have the option to stay in the business excellence community after their service.  A unique alternative to traditional repatriation after a period of time as a belt.  
He closed with a few bullets on sustaining the initiative:

It’s a journey and deployment will change over time.
Get commitment from the top, educate the middle, engage the whole
Development of Business Excellence resources (hard and soft skill) is crucial
Sharing best practices through annual seminar and newsletters
Career path for employees in Business Excellence.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 16:01:25 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Pinnacle Peak Hiking]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/pinnacle_peak_hiking.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wake up to Life Hike, ISSSP Leadership Conference


5:00 AM

5:15 AM - the lively passengers

The Rowdy Back Row!

The "fast" group

Pinnacle Peak

The whole gang
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Conferences]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 15:59:42 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Who's Your Jack Welch?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/whos_your_jack_welch.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was privileged recently to attend the American Society for Quality's World Conference in Houston, TX.  What an energetic gathering of quality-minded people!
One topic that I heard a lot of conversation about was concern for leadership of Lean and Six Sigma.  There were many stories shared of new deployments, attempted deployments, and failed deployments.  One question that I've been asking, when I hear these accounts, is "Who was your Jack Welch?"  In other words, who was the top executive that championed the initiative over all obstacles?
Too many times, I heard that the push for Lean or Six Sigma came from middle management - not a criticism of those individuals, of course, but if top executives don't catch the fever, then the initiative can be treated as a hobby for someone down below.  When the going gets tough, it's easy to fall back on an excuse such as "Six Sigma's not working for us."  As my MBB Todd Sperl used to say, it's the difference between support and commitment.
Therefore, it was not a big surprise to read, in Michael Marx's recent post Project Failure, that the number one reason for failure of Six Sigma projects was... no management support.  I suspect that could read, instead, no top-level executive support.
So now, when I come into an oragnization that says they're "doing" Six Sigma or Lean, I ask:  "Who's your Jack Welch?"  The answer is always illuminating.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 07:01:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Looking for iSixSigma Live 2009 Summit Sessions and Ideas (And Speakers)]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/looking_for_isixsigma_live_2009_summit_sessions_and_ideas_and_speakers.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I’ve received a few requests from people interested in presenting at our upcoming premiere iSixSigma Live Summit. Who doesn’t want to get to warm Miami during January 2009, stick their toes in the sand, enjoy the luxury of Trump International’s five-star hotel and resort, learn more than you have in two days since you started learning Six Sigma, and network with the finest 300 business professionals in the world?
It’s easy to present at our upcoming Summit: suggest a great session. Do that and you have an excellent chance to present.
You can learn more and pitch a session idea here. Presentations/sessions will be accepted through June 30, and then we’ll finish the agenda. After that, we’ll have some additional speaker openings posted. But the best way in is to suggest a killer session before someone else submits the same one!
I look forward to working with you on this conference!
Best regards,Mike
P.S. I think there is tremendous value in sitting back for a moment and thinking over the last 12 month's results. It’s astonishing how many lessons you learn that you forget later in your regular work cycle.
I truly believe that every process improvement professional has learned at least one significant lesson this year that will benefit others, if you only tell it. Here’s your platform to share your test results with the community -- and also to be recognized for the breakthrough results you’ve delivered. (Did I mention that every presenter receives a free pass to the main conference? That’s a $2,200 value! And there are other perks that you’re going to LOVE.)]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 16:43:03 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: To QFD or C &amp; E when defining the VOC]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/to_qfd_or_c_amp_e_when_defining_the_voc.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For defining the 'VOC' (Voice of the Customer), I typically use a QFD (Quality Factor Diagram) -- Of recent, I have found that QFD's can be hard to understand for some, while even more painful for belts to explain to others. 
If you find this to be the case, there are 3 tools used sequentially that can arrive at a similar answer: 

Start wtih an affinity grouping diagram - This approach will help to logically group the world of potential answers you get while interviewing folks in your company. It will also help to keep the lens of the customer's value proposition with your company on during your analysis. Two that wash to the top, for example, are website experience &amp; customer service operators. 
Those groupings can be used as two of the bones of a fishbone diagram (aka cause and effect diagram) - They are synonymous to Manpower and Machinery, two traditional bones of the diagram, if you think about it in terms of the 6 M's. Website experience is a machine, and call center operators would equate to Man. Once you populate all of the drivers or inputs (or x's) that affect a customer's value proposition when they use the website or call into the call center on the fishbone, along with the other 4 bones: Methods(Process), Mother Nature(Environment), Measurements and Materials (tools to do their job), you will most likely notice a commonality between the smaller bones under each heading. For example, under website experience, Manpower (Agents, in our example), you might see inputs like training, administration/support procedures and computer response latency, which are affecting their ability to service the customer. I would expect to see computer response latency under Machinery as well. Likewise, I would expect to see administration/support procedures under Methods as well.
Use those sub-bones that show up the most for fill in the next step which is to apply a cause and effect matrix, to help simplistically drive a stack ranked priority based on relative importance of each output and factor (input) to your business. In my opinion, tt is a poor man's way of extrapolating some of the same benefits that using a QFD would provide while not completing confusing the folks who are trying to distill information from the results set. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Laura Gibbons]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Lean]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 12:40:31 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Decoys]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/decoys.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store! | Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 08:11:07 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Innovation and Six Sigma]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/innovation_and_six_sigma.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There has been a lot of ink spilled lately dithering about Six Sigma and Innovation. Most of it by naysayers who feel that Six Sigma is antithetical to Innovation, or zealots who feel some version of the opposite sentiment. For the life of me, I can’t wrap my mind around either position.
To illustrate my view, let’s talk about some other processes you find in most organizations – perhaps budgeting and talent development. Most businesses have at least an annual budgeting process and an annual talent development process. These are fundamental, and exist in most places out of necessity. Clearly the two have links: it takes money to develop and retain talent, and it takes high caliber people to manage all aspects of cashflow and propel the organization forward. Without good talent development there would eventually be no budget to allocate, and without good budgeting all the talent in the world isn’t going to matter after a couple of quarters.
So talent development and budgeting are both necessary for the success of the organization, but neither is sufficient. Hardly an interesting observation, right? Now suppose someone told you that “your budget process is killing your talent development process.” Well, it could be true, and if so you’d have to fix it. But suppose they went on to say that “talent development is much more important, so you should get rid of the budget process.” That’s ridiculous, right? The very idea makes no sense.
But that’s exactly the argument that is made regarding Six Sigma and Innovation. If I had a nickel for every article I’ve read concluding that Six Sigma kills Innovation so we should jettison Six Sigma, well, I’d probably have about a dollar. But you get my point.
There are two things wrong with this conclusion, regardless of how it is reached. The first one is described above. Six Sigma and Innovation are two separate but related processes that must co-exist in a healthy organization. Both are necessary and neither is sufficient for success. Suggesting that one should be pursued to the exclusion of the other is infantile thinking. I don’t care what you call the attendant programs, but new ideas need to be encouraged and developed, and continuous improvement needs to occur. Of course, Six Sigma can’t be the Innovation program either. Organizations that lack an Innovation program and try to make Six Sigma stand in for it are bound to be disappointed. If you have no talent development process, having a great budget process isn’t going to help.
So the first thing wrong with the conclusion that Six Sigma kills Innovation is that it suggests an opposition between the two processes, falsely implying a choice that isn’t there. You don’t get to choose one or the other. Both are necessary. The trick is to make them work together, just like budgeting and talent acquisition.
The second thing wrong with the conclusion is that, properly structured, Six Sigma and Innovation have an intrinsically synergistic relationship, not an antagonistic one. Just like budgeting and talent development do when properly executed. Despite what you may have read, process and structure are not natural enemies of Innovation.  Bad process and inappropriate structure…maybe those are enemies of Innovation, but then they are the enemy of many other things in the organization too. A bad Innovation program will certainly be a drag on your Continuous Improvement program, and vice versa. But as I have pointed out many times before, the conclusion that poorly run programs perform poorly is not useful or interesting.
It has been my experience that well-run Six Sigma programs generate a tidal wave of new insights and ideas. Indeed, managing the flow of those ideas becomes a central, consuming, happy problem for successful programs. This is true even when a very structured approach is taken. I’m reminded of a story I was once told about an author who decided to write an entire novel without using the letter “e”. You’d think this would be incredibly limiting, but in fact the author ended up learning many, many new words and taking his writing in entirely new directions. The structure forced him to break old habits and think in new ways.
A recent New York Times article by Janet Rae-Dupree makes this point in fascinating depth. Here’s a tease:

“So it seems antithetical to talk about habits in the same context as creativity and innovation. But brain researchers have discovered that when we consciously develop new habits, we create parallel synaptic paths, and even entirely new brain cells, that can jump our trains of thought onto new, innovative tracks.”
Far from killing it, a well-deployed Six Sigma program (or any structured approach to continuous improvement) can be a great partner to Innovation. The reverse point is also true, that Innovation can help Six Sigma. I’m not going to construct an argument to support my belief that Innovation is a necessary component of Continuous Improvement, as I take it to be true almost by definition.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma - IAGTM]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_iagtm.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I recently got a text message from my son.   "Mom . . . Pick me up ATEOTD."   Unable to decipher the text message abbreviation I’m forced to do what any mom what do . . text back . . . What?    "At The End Of The Day" comes the reply with a big UGH!  It’s like a foreign language.  I’m sure the kids are doing it to drive me mad.  But then, maybe it’s just their new language.  
I started thinking about how the whole text abbreviation thing is sort of like what Six Sigma must sound like to those who have not had the chance to participate in training.  "After identifying the CTs and completing a SIPOC, you should start on your FMEA".   I can see how that might sound like gobble-de-gook to an untrained ear.   
When we use Six Sigma tools and methods on a daily basis, it’s easy to get so wrapped up in our own world that we forget that everyone may not be as proficient in the new vocabulary as we are.  I’m trying to keep this in mind when I address a group of people who are new to Six Sigma and have started saying "high level process map" instead of SIPOC and "risk analysis" instead of FMEA.  I think people appreciate the effort.  Over time, the Six Sigma jargon will become second nature.  Until then, you will probably hear them say "Six Sigma. . . IAGTM."]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 16:26:56 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live Seattle]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_live_seattle.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ View the Full Gallery
Last Thursday, May 1st, was iSixSigma’s very first live event from our new division, iSixSigma Live! It was a Social &amp; Networking Party held in Seattle, Washington -- and it was phenomenal!
Over 130 Seattle Six Sigma and quality professionals converged on Rock Bottom Brewery in Bellevue. We rented out the entire top floor of the brewery ("top of the rock") and had a great time. Upon entering, attendees received their name tags and a networking activity which guaranteed they met tens of new people during the event.
The Party featured interesting people, fantastic conversations, an open bar, a lavish appetizer buffet, billiards, music, and a raffle (autographed books, iSixSigma garb, and an iPod Video graciously donated by Instantis). No one left disappointed -- even if they didn’t win a door prize, everyone walked away with an iSixSigma Live! goodie bag full of sponsor offers, tschochkes, coupons and discounts.
The emails are still pouring in:

"There were so many people there I found I had a great opportunity to reach out and make new contacts as well as catch up with former acquaintances." -- David, Philips Medical Systems
"I was looking for Movers and Shakers in the local 6 Sigma community, Michael Cyger and iSixSigma provided the place, and the FUN just started from there." -- Greg, Harnish Group
"I was pleasantly surprised to see that attendance was much higher than I expected. The event was well organized and it provided exactly what advertised. A chance to meet other six sigma professionals in a social event. Good job. I’ll definitely will be attending future iSixSigma events." -- Gerry, Calypso Medical Technologies
"It was really easy to meet people. Everybody had a lot in common, including a passion for organizational excellence through Lean Six Sigma. All you had to ask was "where do you work and what projects are you working on?" This would result in 20+ minutes of great conversation that included valuable knowledge and lessons learned. I would like the next mixer sooner than Sept/Oct." -- Larry, FAA
"This is a great opportunity to meet fellow process improvement professionals, learn about industry happenings and even connect on job opportunities. Plus it is just a lot of fun." -- Michael, The Natural Intelligence Group
"I can’t wait for the next event. When will it be? Not soon enough!"
"Thank you so much for arranging such a fun and meaningful event. I cannot wait for the next opportunity."
"I really enjoyed the party last night. How often do you have them in Seattle? Thanks!"
"Nicely done and thanks for getting us all together."
I can’t wait for the next Social &amp; Networking Party! Thanks to everyone in the local area who came out, and thanks to all our wonderful sponsors for taking part in this fantastic event.

View the full photo gallery here: http://photos.isixsigma.com/gallery/4829650_qzHYF]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 03:08:06 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Hat]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/six_sigma_hat.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  |  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:35:42 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Consultant Within]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_consultant_within.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The state of the US economy notwithstanding, retention of talent is a major issue across many organizations these days. Operational Excellence, Six Sigma, and related disciplines are no exception, with a lot of the mobility fueled by the same high standards for training and certification that are intended to attract folks in the first place.
Indeed, that sucking sound you hear just might be the vacuum created as Black Belts bolt one manufacturing company for another. Or perhaps they’re leaving for jobs in healthcare and finance, both of which seem to be consuming experienced practitioners at an alarming rate. And if you are in China or other similarly hot economies, that sucking sound is probably closer to the wail of a hurricane, as the best talent ricochets from employer to employer with all the subtlety of a midnight freight train.
For the organization suffering defections, there are many downsides to this churn. Consistency is hard to maintain. Standards are hard to enforce. Long-term projects and initiatives are hard to complete. Relationships suffer. Departments break down. And organization memory shrinks to a pinprick.
Priority number one in this environment is, of course, to hold on to your talent. I won’t go into that lengthy topic (others could probably do it more justice anyway), nor will I tarry for an admittedly interesting discussion about why a lot of technical folks feel the need to hop employers to get ahead  in their careers (although I do think that is a fascinating phenomenon).
Instead I want to talk about the flip-side of the phenomenon, and why it can actually be a good thing for an organization. Even the best organizations lose people sometimes, and those people are generally replaced with people from other good organizations. So there is a constant stream of people and knowledge going back and forth. All of which means that, big or small, you probably have a lot of “outside” knowledge resident in your organization. This is old news, and I’m hardly the first one to point it out. But I think its especially true of continuous improvement professionals, and in my experience there isn’t a whole lot being done about it.
This is in part due to a love affair with outside consultants. Many of us were initially trained by outside consultants, and out first instinct in new situations is to look towards them. This is a familiar mode for all involved, but is very expensive and results tend to be mixed at best. What if there was a way to get exactly the same benefits with virtually no cost and very little risk? With as much cross-fertilization as there is going on between companies these days, the best consultants are probably already colleagues just waiting to be consulted. That’s always been the case, but it is exacerbated as the flow of talent is becomes ever more fast, furious, and global.
Like I said, this is hardly an original thought. But even so, I see a lot of consultants engaged for jobs that could very well be done just as well by internal employees. The missing link is a high degree of communication and organization, especially across geography and business functions. For example, if a large company needs 5S help in a plant in Chicago, it is very easy to go out and hire a consultant. But if the company is large enough, there’s probably a distribution center in Warsaw that has already been through a 5S journey and has plenty of expertise and experience to share. The trouble is that the folks in Chicago almost never know about the people in Warsaw. And even if that connection is made, doing something about can look pretty daunting. Getting the domestic consultant in is a lot easier. It may cost more, but it is the kind of cost that the organization is used to paying. 
All of which means that in an environment where talent and experience are migrating both in and out of the organization – like they are right now in Six Sigma and related areas – having the infrastructure and processes in place to identify and leverage expertise globally is at least as important as any other task a deployment executive has. You’ve got people coming in with new skills and experience all the time, and you need to be learning from them and leveraging what they know. You can be victim to the sucking sound, or you can profit from it. Setting up to do that looks and feel a lot different than a traditional deployment, but we’re no longer living in a world where big companies don’t have Black Belts or Continuous Improvement specialists. The question isn’t whether you have them, it’s what you know about them and what are you doing with them.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: More Henry Ford]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/more_henry_ford.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My Lean Thinking colleagues in Maine State Government have also been looking for quotes in Henry Fords writing that would speak to our movement toward more efficient and productive work as individuals, companies and communities.  The one that was chosen for their monthly news letter speaks to the people side of lean. It speaks of the major cause of resistance and poor function in human beings participating in the transformational change that lean process analysis can bring.  When I read this month news letter there it was staring at me.
 

 
“ I pity the poor fellow who is so soft and flabby that he must always have "an atmosphere of good feeling" around him before he can do his work. There are such men. And in the end, unless they obtain enough mental and moral hardiness to lift them out of their soft reliance on "feeling," they are failures”. [i]  
 
 

Whew. Sounds a little strong for todays human resource function. But when you can get past the fatherly toughness you can see that Henry is absolutely right.  Like most self respecting professional continuous improvement professionals, before I looked at all the “other” flabby people in my work environment (clients and professional colleagues) I took a glance at myself.  Don’t get me wrong, I am not into self destruction, but I was raised with the belief that you should look for the log in your own eye before seeking the splinter in another’s eye.  How flabby am I either physically or emotionally?  Honest self assessment?  That is a very difficult thing for many of us to do.  We get very good at measuring process, cycle time, machine tool tolerances and others performance.  But how good are we at looking at self?  I have discovered when I am able to self assess my own production flaws I am much more able to objectively review others. 

 
So I when I worked out last night I worked extra hard and vowed to move towards strength and away from flabby.  Strengthing body and mind through exercise and related activities is one strategy to improve this function.  

 
Another strategy is to examine the response we have when our feelings arise as we are trying to compete our daily tasks. There is a great list of short sayings called  Constructive Living Maxims [ii] which can help each of us get past our feeling and back to what needs being done.  Keep these handy when you start to feel like not working, they may be the thought that puts you back on task.

 
A third strategy for overcoming the power of feelings is good planning. If you do not have a map or plan, feelings can easily become the driving source of decisions.  Then you are in big trouble. When you do not have a plan, you are planning to fail.  What planning tool to you use? There are some six sigma planning tools that can be used.  I know of another.  I recently began working with some old process friends who have developed a planning tool for students and communities.  We used it almost 10 years ago when I chaired our community’s comprehensive plan committee.  The tool is called Running Start .  I am working with them to adapt this tool for disabled adults participating in the voc rehab process and returning veterans who are integrating back into the community. This personal planning process facilitates the development of a plan, gives quantitative feedback regarding the progress being made and keeps you on track so feelings do not dominate decisions and you work the plan which has been developed. It might be a good process to use to reach the decision that you need a Value Stream Map to identify your prime contraint or waste and other process innefficiencies, although the tool alone will help identify those things as well.
 


How does all this relate to Six Sigma?  Seems flabby is much like muda and causes significant reduction in our physical and emotional efficiency. How big is your log? Mine is shrinking, I hope.
 

Bye the way, Michael thanks for the new BB LSS certification process you mentioned in your recent column on April 4, 2008. I now have a certificate on my wall too!  Just like the strawman in the Wizard of Oz. How transformational!




[i] Ford, Henry – My Life and Work, The Project Gutenberg: Release Date: January, 2005-EBook #7213, Produced by Marvin Hodges, Tom Allen, Eric Eldred, Charles Franks and the DP Team
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/7213
 

[ii]  Reynolds, David – Constructive Living Maxims – For more about David Reynolds see http://boat.zero.ad.jp/~zbe85163/
. ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2008 05:52:57 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Salary Data in Spotfire Web Player]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_salary_data_in_spotfire_web_player.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For those of you that joined us for the Six Sigma Salary Webcast in March you saw the software we used to analyze the data.  The application was made available for free download so you could test-drive running analysis on your own. 
I’m happy to announce that the sample iSixSigma salary data is now available for your slicing and dicing pleasure in the Spotfire Web Player, a free web based application that lets you play with the data without downloading the software.
iSixSigma Salary Data in Spotfire Web Player
Not only can you view the iSixSigma Salary data, but Spotfire has built a host of other entertaining applications as well.  From Sports to politics, you can find one to suit you.
As an end note, if you missed the webcast live, it is still available to watch online. You can also still download the trial of Spotfire with the Salary Data included.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:56:02 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Project Failure: Eight Reasons by Minitab]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/project_failure_eight_reasons_by_minitab.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yesterday, I attended a Minitab Webinar showcasing the top 8 reasons Six Sigma projects fail.  Presented by Lou Johnson &amp; Cate Twohill.  Lou took care of the project failure segment (which was the vast majority) and Cate talked a bit about Minitab’s Quality Companion.  
First off they did a fantastic job. Lou’s history and experience with Six Sigma and statistics coupled with his passion for getting to the bottom of project failure…resulted in this fine presentation.  
The data was based off a survey of nearly 150 of Minitab’s customers at nearly 100 different companies.  And yes there were more than eight reasons for failure cited by respondents.  There were actually 42 reasons, but the top eight represented 62 percent of the total.  
Lou laid out the eight reasons with detailed explanations and examples for each reason.  I won’t go in to any detail besides listing them as Lou is sure to give this presentation again and again…
The Top Eight Reasons Six Sigma Projects Fail...
# 8 - The project solution was not implemented# 7 - Project scope too big# 6 - Not enough training# 5 - Project too small for DMAIC rigor# 4 - Project forced into DMAIC# 3 - Project had no data or bad data# 2 - Project not linked to Finances
and the #1 reason Six Sigma projects fail...No management support
The biggest takeaway was, as Lou described it, “Rule #1: Pick the right project.”  Four of the top eight reasons can be attributed to project selection (now comes my favorite part of the presentation, the iSixSigma research quote):

“While only 32% of respondents in organizations with new (less than one year) Six Sigma programs frequently or always use a formal prioritization process, 63% percent of those in organizations with five to ten years experience with Six Sigma do.” iSixSigma Magazine, March/April 2005
Throughout the presentation Lou offered a simple solution to each of the failure modes, and in most cases the solution could be found utilizing one of the features of Minitab’s Quality Companion.  
Thank you Minitab for sharing these findings. Below are some additional articles from iSixSigma about project failure. As you read them you will find that they support Minitab’s findings as well as offer a few other failure modes to consider. 
Tips and Suggestions for Six Sigma Project Success by Simon Bodie
Why Projects Fail by Holly Hawkins
How to Face Failed 6 Sigma Projects iSixSigma Discussion Forum
Understanding Six Sigma Deployment Failures by Mike Carnell
Project Selection Research by Jonathan Atwood, iSixSigma Magazine, March/April 2005
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:29:14 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Six Sigma Buy-in Survey]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/six_sigma_buy_in_survey.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ iSixSigma Magazine’s latest research survey is live! This survey will explore aspects of getting buy-in at all levels in the organization, from the shop floor to the senior executives.    
With your input we’ll be able to better understand what buy-in means to companies and how different levels of Six Sigma buy-in affect deployments. The results of this survey will be published in the September issue of iSixSigma Magazine. 
Please take a few minutes to tell us what Six Sigma buy-in means to you and your company and please pass the word to the naysayers in your company (if any), we need to hear from them too! Thanks.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:11:40 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The basic tools – project selection]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_basic_tools__project_selection.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hello again Blogosphere. My apologies for 1 year of blogging silence. More and more I apply Lean methods to Six Sigma efforts. Overanalysis is a trap in many projects, especially when newly trained belts unleash their newly acquired skills to their first projects. Keep it simple and practical ! It’s amazing what a good executed basic quality or problem solving tool can bring in process improvement results. 
This first blog will be an illustration of how application of basic tools help to structure improvement project selection. 
Recently I was called to assist a customer that had identified a couple of hundred issues in their organization. Off course these can’t be resolved all at the same time. By using some basic tools we managed to sort the wheat from the chaff : categorizing these issues by the KANO model, mapping the issues to the organization process architecture helped us to identify the most critical processes for improvement. Then SIPOC studies of the critical processes identified potential improvement projects by the gap analysis between process inputs and process CTQ’s and process outputs and customer CTQ’s. 
From a couple of hundred issues crying for attention the situation is now focused on a couple of critical improvement projects, just by good execution of some basic tools ... and the good part is, it only took me and the customer team a couple of days to get to this point.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sven Saerens]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 13:18:37 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Systems Thinking and Scope Creep]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/systems_thinking_and_scope_creep.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Project scope issues are probably one of the top failure modes for LSS projects. If the scope is too narrow, leadership doesn’t view the effort as important and doesn’t support it. Too broad, and the improvements are either never implemented, or aren’t sustained due to poor implementation and control. 
 
 
Often out of necessity, projects are chartered and scoped with imperfect data and understanding of the problem. (After all, if the solution was known, launching a project would be unnecessary). By design, DMAIC leads the team through a discovery process that can affect the scope or drive the effort in a new direction entirely. 
 
 
Systems thinking, on the other hand, challenges us to understand the interconnectedness of all things. Such thinking also shows that seemingly discrete processes usually begin and end beyond the defined scope of a LSS project, beyond the boundaries of the department, or even the organization. Firms like Toyota, Rathyeon, Pratt Whitney and others get this – they work with their customers, suppliers, their suppliers suppliers, and so on to achieve more process stability, efficiency, and quality of inputs and outputs. 
 
 
On many projects, particularly early on in a deployment, it’s not long before the project team starts to see opportunities everywhere - problems their department causes for others, problems they deal with caused by others. Things can quickly snowball until a well- scoped green belt project turns into solving global warming. Then there’s the individual that tries to bolt on their particular hobby horse issue to another project, often only peripherally affecting the problem at hand. 
 
 
It takes discipline on the part of the champion, the project leader, and the process owner to maintain the scope of an improvement effort, and stay realistic about what can be accomplished within the timeframe and resource availability of a green belt project.
 
 
So how do you, LSS practitioners, balance the need to manage scope creep, while keeping attuned to the broader context in which the projects are taking place? Please reply using the comments section.
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Facilitating Success]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/facilitating_success.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
 
 
 
 
 
 
What could be tougher than binary logistic regression?  How about facilitating a team?  Team inputs vary in type, personality, knowledge level, background, etc., but the choice for team output is pretty discrete - success or not.
So what does a good facilitator look like?   Here’s what Wikipedia says:

"An individual who enables groups and organizations to work more effectively, to collaborate and achieve synergy"
"One who contributes structure and process to interactions so groups are able to function effectively and make high-quality decisions"
"The facilitator’s job is to support everyone to do their best thinking.   To do this, the facilitator encourages full participation, promotes mutual understanding and cultivates shared responsibility"
For some belts, being a good facilitator may come naturally.  Others may need training and practice to sharpen their skills.  In either case, one thing is for sure - don’t underestimate the need or value of this key skill.  It could make a big difference in whether the team finds success . . . or not.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 03:31:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Minitab Webinar: Project Failure]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/minitab_webinar_project_failure.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Minitab Webinar Top Eight Reasons Why Six Sigma Projects Fail April 23, 11 a.m. - 12 p.m. Eastern 
Next week Minitab is going to present a free Webinar naming the top eight reasons why Six Sigma projects fail. This is sure to be great information for all Six Sigma practitioners. But why stop at eight?  I’m sure we can collectively come up with a nine and ten…I’ll give it a go:
Top ten reasons why Six Sigma projects fail:
Number 10: Black Belts spend all their time reading the Cox-Box cartoon on the iSixSigma Blogosphere.
Number 9: Black Belts get discouraged after they get blasted by Stan on the iSixSigma Discussion Forum.
Please, please, add your own project failure top tens to the list. Maybe Letterman will pick it up...]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:17:24 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Think Lean]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/think_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 08:31:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: New Kid on the Block]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/new_kid_on_the_block.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Now I have achieved my ASQ Black Belt certification and with my brain still packed full of Lean Six Sigma information, I thought I would see if I could collect some more badges. So it’s a big “Lean Six Sigma Certification” welcome to the British Standards Institute (BSI). 
My experience with BSI goes way back to my very first job as a polymer engineer and developing industrial ‘O’ rings to quality standard BS 5750 (I found the company still exists – James Walker).
Things moved on from BS 5750 and it became ISO 9000 and the ISO 9001:2000 kitemark is an international quality standard adopted by over 500,000 companies across 149 countries. 
They seem a little late to market, but I think the brand and its values will bring a lot to developing our profession and giving confidence to our customers.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 09:48:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean Six Sigma for Healthcare]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_six_sigma_for_healthcare.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Quite a few Black Belts from manufacturing environments have told me, "I don't know anything about healthcare, but my industry is in a downturn so I'm looking for a Black Belt job in a hospital.  I figure I can pick up the lingo once I'm there."
I've also been asked to speak to Industrial and Process Engineers who wanted to learn about healthcare so they could apply for jobs in that sector.
Now, I'm in full agreement that healthcare is a hotbed of opportunity for applying Lean and Six Sigma concepts!  And I applaud people who are willing to step out of their comfort zones to try something in a new area.  So here are some tips for Process Improvement Experts seeking to transition from another industry into healthcare.
Things you should NEVER say when discussing Lean Six Sigma with healthcare providers:
1.  "Even though Lean and Six Sigma were developed in manufacturing environments, it's directly applicable to treating patients - after all, it's just like moving widgets down the assembly line!"  (Trust me - this will be perceived as an insult.)
2.  "Everyone will need to do standard work - there's no room for creativity in healthcare processes!"  (Healthcare workers pride themselves on their ability to solve problems in a creative way - lead them gently into the concept of standard work for individual tasks, first.)
3.  "We'll start by giving everyone three days of training in statistical analysis - let's begin with the nursing staff."  (The most polite thing the nurses will do is roll their eyes - anything that takes them away from providing patient care will be suspect.)
4.  "Patient Registration is an area that's non-value-added."  (Don't tell the finance department, and the caregivers who depend on registration information such as emergency contact numbers, that putting accurate information into the computer system isn't a "vital x" for their functions!)
5.  "Doctors are not customers - they're only providers."  (Whoa!  Physicians need to be treated as co-customers with patients - since doctors order tests and treatments, and interpret them on behalf of their patients - and decide which hospital to admit their patients to!)
So - there's your short course for Lean Six Sigma in Healthcare!  Can you think of anything else that should NEVER be said, in healthcare or other industries???]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:37:12 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: MoreSteam's New LSS Certification]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/moresteams_new_lss_certification.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Finally, an international Six Sigma certification to set the standard. MoreSteam.com recently announced a new high tech Lean Six Sigma certification.  Read the Press Release for the details, or go right to the online certification website and get certified.  

"MoreSteam.com announced today a new strategic partnership with ISSISSIPPI.org to apply advanced technology to elevate the Lean Six Sigma certification process. Using proprietary internet-based brain scan technology developed by ISSISSIPPI researchers, Lean Six Sigma professionals can now be certified using a completely objective, scientifically rigorous process – at a fraction of the cost and time required by old school methods such as real-world project evaluations, and question-based testing. This innovative web-based brain scan is completely non-invasive and takes less than a minute to complete."
Earn the respect of your Six Sigma peers.  Visit http://www.ississippi.org/ now and start the process. Only one minute of your time and you’ll have a certificate to mount in your office proclaiming your Belt level.  I tested as a Dark Slate Gray Belt.  It’s been a few years since I actively worked on a Black Belt project...I’m going to have to study up a bit more...  
After you take the certification exam, post up your belt level in the comments section. There are sure to be a plethora of belt colors attainable.
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:08:55 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Live! Seattle Networking Party]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/isixsigma_live_seattle_networking_party.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you live near Seattle and would like to hobnob with the areas finest Six Sigma practitioners in a casual after work setting…attend the iSixSigma Live! Social and Networking Party at the Rock Bottom Brewery in Bellevue.  
Thursday, May 1, from 6 to 8 PM.  Rock Bottom can only hold so many Six Sigma gurus so hurry and register today.  The full details for the event can be found at: http://live.isixsigma.com/seattle ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;iSixSigma Live Events]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 10:40:41 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Total Innovation]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/total_innovation.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In our business we are passionate about achieving breakthrough innovations and I’d like to share a few examples of how we really push the envelope. Lets start with the fire alarm. It’s seldom used for real but reaches right across the whole campus with a very clear message:

“Emergency, please leave the building by the nearest exit.” 
We tapped into this paradigm to alert our numerous project managers to consistently achieve the weekly status report deadline with a very clear message to instruct people wherever they are:

“Emergency, all project managers submit their status report immediately.” 
Imagine the employee delight we achieved with this regular reminder, a simple but really effective change.
Or how about the “Six Sigma Results Tree” we erected in head-office? Our black belts come and randomly pick a low-hanging fruit (project opportunity) and return when complete with a green-paper leaf for each £100k saved. It goes to prove that money does grow on trees.
What about group dynamics in meetings? We reviewed the Six Thinking Hats methodology and didn’t really understand it. So what did we do? We innovated of course! We took the Six Thinking Hats’ one-dimensional concept (e.g. creativity, optimism &amp; judgement) to the next dimension and applied the Roger Hargreaves’ management methodology. We found the Hargreaves - Mr Men approach provided a much richer set of one-dimensional characters as shown: 

We started strongly with clear insights from Mr Clever and outstanding levels of quality from Mr Perfect. Things started to wobble when we found Mr Quiet hiding in the cupboard and Mr Lazy would never show up for meetings. But we had to call a halt when Mr Tickle took his role too passionately and Little Miss Sunshine made a formal HR complaint! But we did enjoy seeing them run around and around the meeting table, “Here comes Mr Tickle……Tickle Tickle Tickle”.
I could share other groundbreaking innovations but I need maintain confidentiality to retain our truly competitive edge!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 01:37:34 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Pivot Table]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_pivot_table.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!  Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:06:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Life After Black Belt?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/life_after_black_belt.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Today's question comes from the realm of business etiquette.  Since I didn't think Miss Manners would have the answer, I'm asking in this forum.
Traditionally, when an organization begins deployment of Six Sigma, "Black Belts" are hired, trained, and certified by their company or an outside vendor.  After some years of service, some Black Belts rotate back out into the world of operations.
When this happens, are you a Black Belt (ret)?  Former Black Belt?  Still a Black Belt, even if it's not still your official title?  If you're certified, do you still put your credentials behind your name?  Or is that just a vanity, if you're not in a Black Belt position?
Inquiring minds want to know!  If you've made the transition from a full-time Black Belt role into a different position, or know someone who has managed this move, please share your opinions &amp; experiences!  
Thanks on behalf of future former Black Belts!]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 07:35:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Magic Mirror On The Wall . . .]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/magic_mirror_on_the_wall___.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[

Magic Mirror on the Wall - Why did my deployment stall?
When companies deploy Six Sigma, most have a vision of what that will mean to the organization.  It might be improved customer satisfaction, or shorter cycle time or better quality products, cost reduction, revenue growth or maybe achieving an overall culture of excellence.  Whatever the vision, there is nothing more disappointing than finding out that after years of doing everything on the "deployment to-do list," the benefits did not materialize.  
Eventually the finger pointing will start.  Were the projects not the right ones? Were the black belts not working fast enough?  What about the metrics?   Why have other companies been successful?  Leaders will want to know the answer to these and numerous other questions all leading to them to the same ultimate question which is "What is the secret to success?"
The answer is not a secret at all but only requires that the leader take a long hard look in the mirror.  Yes, the mirror will show them who is ultimately responsible.   It is them.  Whether they like it not, the success of any Six Sigma deployment is a direct reflection of the leader’s passion and engagement.   Why have they not seen this before now?  Maybe they are vampires?  I think I’ll save that thought for a Halloween blog.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:32:28 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lucky Kat Six Sigma for Kids]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/lucky_kat_six_sigma_for_kids.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Lucky Kat Television, in association with Dr. Mikel J. Harry, is launching a Six Sigma for kids program. The online TV network has partnered with several education and entertainment companies to build a fun online learning network for kids.  
Part of the fun will be teaching kids about Six Sigma through Harry’s Six Sigma for Kids program set to debut soon.  Read Dr. Harry’s letter announcing the progress and watch Lucky Kat’s interview with Dr. Harry on Lucky Kat TV. In Dr. Harry’s own words:

“We will learn how to dream the big dream. Think about that big dream. Plan how to realize that big dream, and do the actions that are necessary to bring it into reality.”
This is exciting stuff if I do say so myself.  Teaching our children to think analytically at early ages will make high school, college and managing their careers so much easier.  I’ve signed my kids up to learn Six Sigma from the Lucky Kat.  Check out the classroom at the Katville Academy! (Must register and sign in to explore the island and learn.)

Child Education and Entertainment Meet Lucky Kat, Press release, March 27, 2008]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:42:40 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Revisiting Henry Ford]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/revisiting_henry_ford.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have been re-reading Henry Fords book “My Life and Work”. I got the idea to re-read this from Walter Lowell, the Lean Initiative Director at the Maine Department of Health and Human Services. It is available as an e-book from The Project Gutenberg.(see below)
In this wonderful book Ford talks about how he developed the horseless carriage. In terms of efficiency and lean use of energy, this was one of the first innovative engineering ideas that contributed to the industrialization of America. We all know the story and how it developed including Henry’s idea of interchangeable parts and, I would argue, one of the first Value Stream Mapping demonstrations of the lean use of people using the manufacturing production line. This led me to thinking about our current manufacturing dilemma in America and how my professional training in job analysis and vocational rehabilitation could begin to create some solutions for our manufacturing industry in America. More importantly my client base everyday is growing with 50 something men and women who only know how to use their hands to make stuff.  They find themselves unemployed or underemployed and worn out from $8.00 dollar an hour service jobs and in dire need of some real work and a livable wage. They have worked in construction and manufacturing and now can’t find anything reasonable to do. 
All political rhetoric aside it is a real problem for many American citizens both disabled and able bodied. How can lean thinking utilized by our government and manufacturing sector begin to solve this problem. What would Henry do?
As I read Henry’s book I looked for inspiration to combine all this evolving knowledge I have recently gained with the problem of our shrinking industrial base and my charge to help individuals with disabilities and related barriers find and maintain gainful employment in an integrated and competitive employment environment. This was the first quote I decided to build upon.
“The Government is a servant and never should be anything but a servant. The moment the people become adjuncts to government, then the law of retribution begins to work, for such a relation is unnatural, and inhuman”. 
I guess that means that if the government is creating useless jobs that do not grow the economy then in the end an unproductive dependency is created. But workforce development programs going back to the Conservation Corp have contributed to our economic development in this country including the development of the interstate system and many other infrastructure projects that support and sustain businesses in our country. 
Lean government proponents would do well to combine value stream mapping and other LSS tools with workforce development programming and provide a boost to our manufacturing sector. What an idea… use Henry’s Fords evolved manufacturing ideas combined with job analysis and employability development models and put our citizens back to work making stuff. What stuff? Stuff that comes from natural resources found in America. This is not entitlement but rather building on our historical strengths. 
Lean thinking is a transformational concept that must remain part of our entrepreneurial and public sector strategic planning. Where’s the muda?
Reference. Ford, Henry – My Life and Work, The Project Gutenberg: Release Date: January, 2005 [EBook #7213] Produced by Marvin Hodges, Tom Allen, Tonya Allen, Eric Eldred, Charles Franks, and the DP Team The Gutenberg Project]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Stephen C. Crate]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Government&nbsp;,&nbsp;Innovation]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 06:05:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Cash: The Biggest “Y” of All]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/cash_the_biggest_y_of_all.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Every Six Sigma project is (or should be) built around improving a primary process metric: the Big Y. From there, we drill down into the critical factors, as measured by the “little y’s” – if we can improve the right factors, the primary metric will improve, and we can all declare victory and move on. 
 
One frequent frustration of green and black belts is that getting resources and priority on their improvement projects is difficult, leading to long project cycle times and a sense of disappointment and anti-climax when the control phase comes to an end. It doesn’t need to be this way.
 
Which brings me to the title of this piece: Cash. Recently I read a post on a Lean discussion board in response to a question about what metrics to use in valuing lean projects. An astute poster replied: cashflow. Reduced inventory and defects, more efficient use of materials and labor, and increased throughput will all find their way to the bottom line. The cash levels of the company are one of the best ways to measure health. Conversely, if the cash situation is not improving, that should prompt an evaluation of current projects, especially if expense reduction as an explicit or implicit goal of Lean Six Sigma at the company. 
 
The financial piece of Lean Six Sigma projects is often viewed as a necessary evil by Green and Black belts – for many, the language of accounting and finance is as engaging as the finer details of two-way ANOVA with replication and blocking. Many companies don’t have activity based costing for manufacturing processes, let alone transactional ones, and the process of establishing the financial opportunity for a Lean Six Sigma effort can seem like non-value-added activity.
 

Let me suggest that Black Belts and Master Black Belts would be wise to spend time with a CFO or Controller, to understand what the business leaders are looking at to run the business. Take the time to understand the difference between the Balance Sheet and the Income Statement, Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return, EBITDA and Cashflow. Your business leaders may in fact be paying far closer attention to these metrics than process metrics. And the next time you have to explain how your projects affect the company, you can speak the language of business – cash.
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[James Considine]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Naysayers in Erie County]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/naysayers_in_erie_county.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Six Sigma in Erie County is seeing setbacks as skeptic county legislators put a cap on the Six Sigma budget. The initial one million dollars planned has been slashed to $120,000.  

“I’m one of the skeptics, I believe. They didn’t name me Doubting Thomas for nothing,” Legislator Thomas J. Mazur, D-Cheektowaga, said Thursday. “I am glad the control board slowed down this steamroller.”
“I’m not sure we are going to be saving these millions and millions of dollars,” Legislator Timothy M. Wroblewski”
They want to pilot the initiative first, to see what happens…If only the legislators had done their research before making such a hasty decision.  iSixSigma Magazine research from Nov/Dec 2005 outlines the ins and outs of starting up a Six Sigma initiative.  
Finding One: You get what you pay for.  
Fifty percent of respondents (536) from companies that invested less than 500K on Six Sigma the first two years didn’t even see their investment back.  Nearly 75 percent of respondents (260) from companies that invested 500K to 1 million saw an ROI of 2x or more.  As the spending increased, so did the ROI. (Finding 1, Table 1.2, pg. 34)
Finding Three: Companies that begin with an enterprise-wide initiative have a higher ROI than those that start with a pilot program. 
Fifty three percent of respondents from companies who did not make their initial investment back the first two years worked from companies who started with a pilot initiative. Sixty percent of respondents from companies who saw an ROI of 8x or more worked for companies who started Six Sigma enterprise-wide.  (Finding 3 Table 1.2, pg. 38)  
I’m afraid that unless Hammond can really focus his efforts under the budget constraint, the legislators have sowed their own seeds of mediocrity.  Hammond and the Six Sigma team should still be able to save money despite the cuts.  After all, this is a government organization, where like it or not, admit it or not, there are apples, oranges and mangoes just laying around for the plucking.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Government]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:13:52 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: A System Beyond Their Control]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/a_system_beyond_their_control.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Deming proposed his famous “Red Bed” experiment more than half a century ago. These days, videos and descriptions circulate freely via the web, and there are many books and other publications that describe the experiment. But even for those who are familiar with its lessons, the applicability of the experiment and what it teaches are as striking today as they must have been the first time it was run.
If you aren’t familiar with the Red Bead experiment, there’s a pretty good overview here. Briefly, the Red Bead experiment can be summarized like this...
Workers are asked to “produce” red beads by dipping a dimpled paddle into a large container full of beads. Management has set up “the system” such that the container is filled with a mixture of mostly red beads, but also a small fraction of white beads. Thus, when workers pull out their paddle, they inevitably pull out some white beads along with the red ones. Regardless of how workers try (and if you’ve ever done this experiment live, you’ll know that they do try), their paddles always pick up some white beads. In fact, the red bead experiment is set up such that there is very little that can be done by the worker to influence the results. The point, to paraphrase Deming, is that all workers perform within a system that is beyond their control.
Beyond that fundamental message, there are many, many things to be learned from the Red Bead experiment. Deming, for example, famously tracked the performance of various paddles over time, noting that even paddles that were “the same” regressed to different averages and standard deviations over time. Thus different workers in the same system who are ranked according to the defects they produce are being ranked on random differences attributable to the system, rather than on their own individual performance. This is just one example - Deming and others have taken the basic lessons of the Red Bead experiment in scores of directions to illuminate all sorts of lessons.
In my experience, the most common reaction to seeing, playing, or reading about the Red Bead experiment is this: so what – isn’t that obvious? And it is, of course. The genius of Deming’s set up is that it is completely, blindingly obvious what will happen. The genius is that is strips away all the smoke and mirrors of real life situations and makes the conclusions obvious. But even so, the lessons of Red Bead still haven’t sunk into general consciousness. Even for those of us who study it and ruminate on it, the lessons are easy to forget and hard to implement. This must be the case, because the experiment keeps repeating itself over and over again in real life, and we keep trying to blame the workers for the failings of the system.
Consider the recent foibles of trader Jérôme Kerviel and French bank Société Générale, described here in an account by the New York Times.
SocGen and Kerviel’s story has been smothered n coverage – a $7 billion USD loss will do that – and virtually all of the articles (including the one cited above) describe Kerviel as a “rogue trader”. In fact, a Google search combing the terms “Kerviel” and “rogue trader” turns up no less than 700-800 results.
But was Kerviel’s behavior really “rogue”, as in aberrant, different, or going against the usual behavior at SocGen? To be perfectly honest, I don’t have any sort of informed opinion of the answer to that question. I’m not well versed in the general area, and I had never heard of Société Générale before this story broke. But I do have a hunch. I can tell you that all the accounts and interviews I have read, including comments by other employees, indicate that the far from being rogue, Kerviel’s behavior and practices were encouraged and expected. My reading is that he was a classic manifestation of a system carefully crafted and maintained over time by SocGen. All of which makes the a classic case of the Red Bead experiment.
Let me be clear that this hypothesis did not require and special cleverness on my part. In fact, the New York Times article makes the same point:

While management depicts the 31-year-old Mr. Kerviel as a lone operator who spiraled out of control, interviews with current and former Société Générale employees suggest that he was also the product of an environment where risk taking was embraced, as long as it made money for the bank.
To put it in Red Bead terms, Kerviel was doing nothing more than sticking his paddle into the container and pulling it out. For a long time, he had seen a normal number of white beads come out. One day early this year, he stuck in his paddle like he had been taught to do (heavily rewarded for doing, in fact) and got a few more white beads than normal. Random variation is like that. But for Kerviel on this day, voila, he became an instant pariah. SocGen built the container, added the red and white beads, designed the paddles, and taught Kerviel how to put his in and draw it out. Kerviel what he was expected to do. In December he was up $2 billion. In January he was down $7 billion. Like I said, random variation is like that. So who should be made the pariah?
If you don’t like Red Bead, you can think of it in control chart terms. Standard six sigma control limits mean that normal variation will fall within the control limits 99.99967% of the time, right? Which means that one out of every 300,000 will fall out of the control limits with no attributable cause. Now, are there 300,000 folks like Kerviel out there? Or maybe 3000 who perform strings of trades 100 times in a year? If there is, then sooner or later one of them is going have results that fall outside the limits, just like Kerviel did. If that happens to go in the right direction, they get a huge bonus (like Kerviel probably did in years past). If it goes in the wrong direction, they get to be the subject of an uncomfortable article in the New York Times. Even though it is all normal variation, even though it is all the Red Bead experiment, playing itself out again and again.
Now, I certainly don’t mean to absolve Kerviel of guilt. What he did was clearly wrong; it threw up a number of warning flags and violated all sorts of rules. But it can’t be called unexpected in any way. It was a logical output of the system that SocGen built. Punishing Kerviel isn’t going to do a thing about that. Red Bead.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Andrew Downard]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;History]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 22:01:00 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: House, M.D.]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/house_md.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[While flipping around the channels a while ago, I happened to catch an episode of "House."  This show, for those unfamiliar with it, features a physician in a hospital setting.  He's faced with patients who have complex and puzzling disease conditions that he must diagnosis in order to save their lives.  I was intrigued, at first.
But after watching a few episodes, I found the plot of each episode to be similar.  House is confronted with a patient who has puzzling symptoms.  He guesses one diagnosis, and makes his residents do all kinds of diagnostic tests.  Sometimes he treats on the basis of his presumptive diagnosis, and this can lead to complications.  Then, when the first guess doesn't prove correct, he makes another guess and has his residents do lots more diagnostic testing, sometimes invasive.  Again, presumptive treatment may result in adverse effects.  When the puzzle still isn't solved, he tries a third time and (you guessed it) after further diagnostic tests, he hits on the correct solution and now can give the patient the treatment they've needed all along.
This may make for compelling medical drama, but I hope my own physician has a better diagnostic track record than House seems to have.
Upon reflection, I realized that it reminded me about how we improved our business processes before we started to use Lean and Six Sigma.  Often, the leader would guess at what was wrong with a process, come up with a solution, write the memo, and then be surprised when the expected improvement didn't appear.  Sometimes, the process became even less effective.  Then, it was "back to the drawing board" and another solution from the mind of the leader would get published as a memo.  And so on.
I am very happy to have learned a more  effective method for facilitating change in the business (in my case, healthcare) environment.  With leadership commitment, engagement of the front-line workers and stakeholders, setting targets according to the customer's CTQs, analyzing the process in order to create solutions, and using statistical process control to sustain the gains, we can produce positive change that gets the organization closer to where it needs to be to remain competitive.
Will anybody ever pitch a drama to the networks that uses a Lean / Six Sigma Black Belt as its protagonist?  But then, it's not very dramatic to show someone following a proven methodology to create streamlined, effective processes, is it???]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:57:46 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Weakest Link]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_weakest_link.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Last week I spent an evening at the local emergency center with my mom.  The experience reminded me of the old saying "You are only as good as your weakest link."  And here’s why. . . 
When I walked into the emergency center I was immediately accosted by a huge poster focused on customer service which promised that we would been seen in thirty minutes or less:)  Hmmm I thought, this may be interesting to watch.  After a brief check-in we waited about ten minutes before being screened and were immediately shown to a room in the back.   (Wow - I thought to myself.  I wonder if these folks are doing Six Sigma.)  Within the next hour, the doctor stopped by, a knee x-ray was taken and a very nice lady came by to officially "log us in."    Things slowed down a bit and we were advised that nothing was broken but that a steroid shot was needed and that it had been ordered from the pharmacy.  OK - bring it on. . .  OK - bring it on . . . Hello - is anyone out there?
Two hours later I stepped up to the front desk to inquire about the prescription.  The front desk was very quick to tell me that it was the pharmacy’s fault; "they were the hold up."   The pharmacy - in this case also known as the weakest link - had successfully turned this WOW experience into an OW experience.  After a total visit time of five hours and ten minutes, we were finally on our way home.  
The experience reminded me that the customer doesn’t really care whose ’fault’ it is.  Suck it up and take responsibility for your process.  If you are part of the process then you are part of the process.  No matter how good you think your piece of the process performs, the customer feels the whole process and in the end -  you are only as good as your weakest link.
Although great improvement in parts of the overall process had been made, it still needs more work.  My suggestion for immediate action would be to take down the customer service poster flaunting quick and excellent service.  You wouldn’t want any of your patients to die laughing on their way out.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Customer Satisfaction]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 04:32:59 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: The Camping Project]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/the_camping_project.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
Visit the Cox-Box Store!   Buy this Cox-Box cartoon strip on a mug!
The Cox-Box is Copyright © 2000-2008 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox – All Rights ReservedReproduction Without Permission Is Prohibited – Request Permission]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gary P. Cox]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[The Cox-Box]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 09:00:10 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: ASQ CSSBB]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/asq_cssbb.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In January I looked through the ASQ body of knowledge (BoK) for Black Belt and said to myself, “I know most of this stuff now”. So put in my entry and passed the Mar’08 exam. I thought I would share the experience, as I believe a number of practitioners may have looked at the ASQ exam. Get a good foundationI reviewed the ASQ exam a couple of years ago and concluded I did not have the experience to guarantee a pass. So waited until I had delivered the projects, trained the Black Belts and invested my spare time in learning the tools. After all this I decided I had the right foundations in place. ASQ recommend three-years work experience and that seems about right.
Find what you don’t knowReading through the BoK and doing the sample exam I identified clear areas of weakness. Coming from a Transactional background, there were manufacturing areas I had never covered in particular around Measurement Systems and Design of Experiments.
Invest the time in preparationI went through every section of the BoK. Be ready for set-piece questions that require calculating from equations, things like confidence intervals and probability. If you are used to having Minitab do the work, practice doing the equations. I invested in the QCI Exam CD and although I found some of the questions infuriatingly ambiguous it does help.
On the dayThe exam is open book and covers 150 questions over 4 hours so it’s a bit of a slog. I found my collection of books &amp; materials were good enough and included Six Sigma, Lean, DFSS, Statistics and quick-reference books. I found I needed to refer to all of these during the exam.
Next StepsI found the brief review of the industry greats, Deming, Juran, Ohno &amp;Taguchi whet my appetite and am keen to learn more. Now I have covered the BoK I am ready to move on and am looking now at understanding the big-picture stuff like strategy planning, target operating model and other related areas
Good luck if you are planning to gain ASQ, let me know if any questions.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:46:33 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Right First Time, Every Time!]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/right_first_time_every_time.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Imagine a world in which we routinely do things Right First Time, Every Time. There would be no more rework as first time yield is 100% and no need to coach &amp; mentor as green &amp; black belts hit the ground running. Unfortunately it tends to be the case that in order to be Right First Time you need to Get It Wrong Lots of Times First. It’s just a people-thing, they learn from their mistakes.
But that’s where Six Sigma comes into play. Why bother getting improvements wrong when you can accurately define the key output as a function of the key inputs (DMAIC) or design new processes clearly linked to customer needs (DFSS)?
Now I have done numerous projects that require detailed technical analysis and lots of problem solving tools to get the root-cause. Extensive re-engineering follows with major IT changes. So it was nice to have a project that presented as essentially poor end-to-end process management. I have been looking forward to doing Kaizen for some time and must say it works. 
The change in style is important in order to get the people involved and engaged in owning and delivering improvements to their own processes. It’s all about looking to embed the idea that they own the continual improvement of their process rather than having a project come and “Do It” to them. It’s all about getting them into the habit of wanting to improve rather than trying to get it Right First Time. 
I guess it defines the difference between process improvement – highly targeted projects and continual improvement – people repeatedly improving their process?
 
 ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Robin Barnwell]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Change Management&nbsp;,&nbsp;General&nbsp;,&nbsp;Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:00:36 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Achieving Lean]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/achieving_lean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There's a great quote from Shakespeare's "Twelfth Night" that I was thinking of today, in relation to how we teach lean.  The character Malvolio says, "Be not afraid of greatness.  Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon 'em."
So, with apologies to Will...
"Some are born lean, some achieve lean, and some have lean thrust upon 'em."
When our organization started to explore lean methods, we were informed that we would learn by doing.  No classes!  (That sure felt like having lean "thrust upon us" at the time.)  The Toyota way is to teach lean as an integral part of the job, as the tasks are learned.  In our situation, since we weren't "born lean," our sensei taught us tools and concepts throughout the first Rapid Improvement Event.  When we asked how we could learn to lead events ourselves, we were told that we would have to do hundreds of events before we could consider ourselves to be senseis.
Well, I confess - we didn't listen.  We incorporated lean concepts and tools into our classes and taught our leaders lean right along with Six Sigma.  We even renamed our Green Belts as Lean Green Belts.  We started running our own events and had many successes - some failures, but with overall effectiveness.
So although we weren't born lean, we seem to have figured out how to work toward achieving lean.
The question that I'm pondering is, how do other organizations approach this issue?  Do you teach lean concepts and tools to your employees in a classroom setting?  Or do you espouse the "learn-by-doing" philosophy?  I'm interested to find out what has worked for you.]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Sue Kozlowski]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Leadership&nbsp;,&nbsp;Lean&nbsp;,&nbsp;Management]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 17:18:50 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Salary Webcast Now Available]]></title>
			<link>http://www.sixsigmacompanies.com/archive/salary_webcast_now_available.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[







Thank you to all who attended iSixSigma’s premier webcast.  We had a great time delivering it live from Boston last week.  If you missed it though…it is now available online for your viewing pleasure.  Follow the link below to get started: http://spotfire.tibco.com/events/webcasts/detail.cfm?id=7231 
Gary Cox drew a special Cox-Box just for the event. The only place to see it is on the webcast.  You’ll be asked to register with Spotfire by creating a profile first, and then you’ll be set to go.  Run time is 59 minutes 47 seconds including Q &amp; A.  
After viewing the webcast (or during for you multi-taskers), you can download a sample set of the salary data in the Spotfire application.  You control the slicing and dicing.  I highly recommend taking Spotfire for a spin with the salary data.  http://registration.spotfire.com/eval/ 
Thanks again to all. 
]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Marx]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;Research]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:37:11 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: SigmaLeanZenOut]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/sigmaleanzenout.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[
What the heck is SigmaLeanZenOut?   It is what a lot of people are doing in the world of continuous improvement.  No matter where you got started, most companies gradually evolve to SigmaLeanZenOut.  Six Sigma deployments add Lean, Kaizen, and then Workout (not necessarily in that order).   Lean Deployments add Kaizen, Workout then Six Sigma.  You get the picture.  So why is this happening?  It is because people are discovering that the combination of all these methodologies opens the door to applying continuous improvement methods to almost any situation.    Your starting point (which methodology) will depend on your initial bias but most likely, you will eventually end up incorporating or integrating many methodologies. 
So what are companies calling their ’thing’.  Most likely, it is whatever they started with.  Most companies don’t seem to go through the effort of renaming their continuous improvement approach as they add methodologies for fear that it might make the organization feel like whatever they started with was the "flavor of the day" and the organization must now move on to the next thing.  Nothing would be more fun for a naysayer than to jump up and shout "See, Six Sigma didn’t work so we now have to do Lean Six Sigma or Six Sigma Plus".   Some companies initially "brand" their approach by calling it "Customer First" or "Process Excellence" and incorporate Six Sigma, Lean, Kaizen and Workout as they deploy.
If you are just starting a deployment (whether it is Lean, Six Sigma, Workout, Kaizen, whatever), think about calling it something that is robust enough to handle the integration of other methodologies.  If you feel like you need to use the right ’name’ to get the industry credibility then incorporate an adder like ’plus’ to the name.   I sort of like naming your continuous improvement approach something that has the word ’excellence’ in it.  Who can argue with wanting to be excellent?
No matter what you name it or how you get started, the important part is that your foundation include the proper integration of your approach(es) with your company strategy, goals, and leadership development and that you keep adding to your continuous improvement toolkit.   Eventually you too will be doing SigmaLeanZenOut.  (and it is almost as much fun to say as "Farfegnugen"!)
How has your company integrated the methodologies and what do you call it?  Please feel free to post &amp; share.  ]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Gianna Clark]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Methodology]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2008 04:36:26 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: iSixSigma Salary Survey Webcast Recording -- Coming Soon]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/isixsigma_salary_survey_webcast_recording_coming_soon.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I’ve received a decent number of emails and calls from people who wanted to see our premiere webcast, but couldn’t attend for one reason or another. Rest assured, we will be releasing a recorded version of the webcast soon. We’re still finalizing the recording, landing page, etc. Stay tuned to the iSixSigma Blogosphere for an update.
(By the way, we topped out at more than 1,000 registrants for our first-ever webcast! Everyone that registered -- thanks for making the premiere iSixSigma webcast a blockbuster.)]]></description>
			
			<author><![CDATA[Michael Cyger]]></author>
			
			<category>
			<![CDATA[Buzz/Press&nbsp;,&nbsp;General]]>
			</category>
			<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:45:37 -0800</pubDate>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Six Sigma Blogs: Lean?  or Mean?]]></title>
			<link>http://blogs.isixsigma.com/archive/lean_or_mean.html</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I was privileged to speak at a conference in San Francisco last weekend, sponsored by the American Society for Clinical Pathology.  The topics focused on leadership in the clinical (medical) labora