Six Sigma Solutions
 


 Tuesday, June 3, 2008


What is Six Sigma?

Six Sigma Quality

What is Six Sigma?

 

      The concepts surrounding the drive to Six Sigma quality are essentially those of statistics and probability. In simple language, these concepts boil down to, “How confident can I be that what I planned to happen actually will happen?” Basically, the concept of Six Sigma deals with measuring and improving how close we come to delivering on what we planned to do.

 

      Anything we do varies, even if only slightly, from the plan. Since no result can exactly match our intention, we usually think in terms of ranges of acceptability for whatever we plan to do. Those ranges of acceptability (or tolerance limits) respond to the intended use of the product of our labors–the needs and expectations of the customer. The language commonly used would be the distribution curve.

 

Distribution curves tell us not only how well our processes have done; they also tell us the probability of what our process will do next. Statisticians group those probabilities in

segments of the distribution curve called standard deviations from the mean. The symbol they use for standard deviation is s, the lower-case Greek letter sigma.

 

      For any process with a standard distribution (something that looks like a bell-shaped curve), the probability is 68.26% that the next value will be within one standard deviation from the mean. The probability is 95.44% that the same next value will fall within two standard deviations. The probability is 99.73% that it will be within three sigma; and 99.994% that it will be within four sigma.

 1

If the range of acceptability, or tolerance limit, for your product is at or outside the four sigma point on the distribution curve for your process, you are virtually assured of producing acceptable material every time–provided, of course, that your process is centered and stays centered on your target value.

 

      Unfortunately, even if you can center your process once, it will tend to drift. Experimental data show that most processes that are in control still drift about 1.5 sigma on either side of their center point over time. This means that the real probability of a process with tolerance limits at four sigma producing acceptable material is actually more like 98.76%–not 99.994%. To reach near-perfect process output, the process capability curve must fit inside the tolerances such that the tolerances are at or beyond six standard deviations, or Six Sigma, on the distribution curve. That is why we call our goal Six Sigma quality.

 

Quality makes us strong

      In the past, conventional wisdom said that high levels of quality cost more in the long run than poorer quality, raising the price you had to ask for your product and making you less competitive. Balancing quality with cost was thought to be the key to economic survival.

 

      The surprising discovery of companies which initially developed Six Sigma, or world-class, quality is that the best quality does not cost more. It actually costs less. The reason for this is something called cost-of-quality. Cost-of-quality is actually the cost of deviating from quality–paying for things like rework, scrap and warranty claims. Making things right the first time–even

if it takes more effort to get to that level of performance–actually costs much less than creating then finding and fixing defects.

 

Shooting for Six Sigma: An illustrative fable

      The underlying logic of Six Sigma quality involves some understanding of the role of statistical variation. Here’s a story about that. Robin Hood is out in the meadow practicing for the archery contest to be held next week at the castle. After Robin’s first 100 shots, Friar Tuck, Robin’s Master Black Belt in archery, adds up the number of hits in the bull’s eye of each target. He finds that Robin hit within the bull’s eye 68% of the time.

2

Friar Tuck plots the results of Robin’s target practice on a chart called a histogram. The results look something like this.

3 

“Note that the bars in the chart form a curve that looks something like a bell,” says the friar. “This is a standard distribution curve. Every process that varies uniformly around a center point will form a plot that looks like a smooth bell curve, if you make a large enough number of trials or, in this case, shoot enough arrows.” Robin scratches his head.

 

      Friar Tuck explains that Robin’s process involves selecting straight arrows (raw material); holding the bow steady and smoothly releasing the bowstring (the human factor); the wood of the bow and the strength of the string (machinery); and the technique of aiming to center the process on the bull’s eye (calibration and statistical process control). The product of Robin’s process is an arrow in a target. More specifically, products that satisfy the customer are arrows that score. Arrows outside the third circle on these targets don’t count, so they aredefects. Robin’s process appears to be 100% within specification. In other words, every product produced is acceptable in the eyes of the customer.  

            “You appear to be a three- to four-sigma archer,” the friar continues. “We’d have to measure a lot more holes to know for sure, but let’s assume that 99.99% of your shots score–that you’re a four sigma shooter.” Robin strides off to tell his merry men.

 

    The next day, the wind is constantly changing directions; there is a light mist. Robin thinks he feels a cold coming on. Whatever the reason, his process doesn’t stay centered on the mean the way it did before. In fact, it drifts unpredictably as much as 1.5 sigma either side of the mean. Now, instead of producing no defects, after a hundred shots, Robin has produced a defect, a hole outside the third circle. In fact, instead of 99.99% of his shot scoring only 99.38%.

 

            While this may not seem as if much has changed, imagine that, instead of shooting at targets, Robin was laser-drilling holes in turbine blades. Let’s say there were 100 holes in each blade. The probability of producing even one defect-free blade would not be good. (Because the creation of defects would be random, his process would produce some good blades as well as some blades with multiple defects.)

 

 4

Without inspecting everything many times over (not to mention spending an enormous amount for rework and rejected material), Robin, the laser driller, would find it virtually impossible to ever deliver even one set of turbine blades with properly drilled holes. Not only would the four-sigma producer have to spend much time and money finding and fixing defects before products could be shipped, but since inspection cannot find all the defects, she would also have to fix problems after they got to the customer. The Six Sigma producer, on the other hand, would be able to concentrate on only a handful of defects to further improve the process.

 

      How can the tools of Six Sigma quality help? If Robin the archer were to use those tools to become a Six Sigma sharpshooter instead of a four-sigma marksman, when he went out into the wind and rain, he would still make every shot score. Some arrows might now be in the second circle, but they would all still be acceptable to the customer, guaranteeing first prize at the contest. Robin the laser driller would also succeed; he would be making virtually defect-free turbine blades.

 

Words of Wisdom about Quality

      If you believe it is natural to have defects, and that quality consists of finding defects and fixing them before they get to the customer, you are just waiting to go out of business. To improve speed and quality, you must first measure it–and you must use a common measure. The common business-wide measures that drive our quality improvement are defects per unit of work and cycle time per unit of work. These measures apply equally to design, production, marketing, service, support and administration.

 

      Everyone is responsible for producing quality; therefore, everyone must be measured and accountable for quality. Measuring quality within an organization and pursuing an aggressive rate of improvement is the responsibility of operational management.

 

      Customers want on-time delivery, a product that works immediately, no early life failures and a product that is reliable over its lifetime. If the process makes defects, the customer cannot easily be saved from them by inspection and testing. A robust design (one that is well within the capabilities of existing processes to produce it) is the key to increasing customer satisfaction and reducing cost. The way to a robust design is through concurrent engineering and integrated design processes. Because higher quality ultimately reduces costs, the highest quality producer is most able to be the lowest cost producer and, therefore, the most effective competitor in the marketplace.

 

  Posted by Admin at 14:22 | General | Comments( 1067 )



 Thursday, June 19, 2008


Six Sigma in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs)

Six Sigma in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs)

 satnamarct2

Very often company managers and directors try to relate Six Sigma to large organizations or Multi-National Corporations (MNCs).  They often think that Six Sigma can only be applied successfully to large corporations where resources and funds are available quite easily or sometimes in abundance. Yet part of this statement can be true, however, there is no restriction on the application of Six Sigma whether it is practiced in large corporations or SMEs. The fundamental concept of Six Sigma is to improve processes whilst improving the quality of the process outputs. Let’s begin with defining Six Sigma relative to processes to understand the fundamental concept of Six Sigma within this context.

 

      Sigma itself is a statistical concept that represents the amount of variation present in a process relative to customer requirements or specifications. When a process operates at a higher sigma level, the variation is so small that the resulting process and services are virtually defect-free. In addition to being a statistical measure of variation, Six Sigma also refers to a business philosophy of focusing on continuous improvement by understanding customer needs, analyzing business processes and instituting proper measurement methods. Furthermore, it is a methodology than an organization uses to ensure that it is improving its key processes[1].

      Fouweather et al. (2006) stressed that Six Sigma training for SMEs can be of great benefit as it gives opportunities for any company to become more efficient and competitive[2]. The cost of this training is often too much for SMEs however, leaving them at a severe disadvantage to their larger competitors. In their research, Fouweather et al. (2006) showed how statistical techniques can be applied to facilitate improvements in efficiency, reduction in waste and rejects and the general improvement of processes and how this is turn can improve the competitiveness of a SME. A case study showed how a local chemical company used modelling techniques within Six Sigma to increase their profitability. The delegates modelled their drying process with the tools learned in the six sigma training course and through this predictive model, the company was able to produce an extra batch each week representing £6,000 (RM37,800) profit for the company and so this had the potential to dramatically increase revenue and improve the profitability by £300,000 (RM1.89million) per year.

      Wessel & Burcher (2004) on the hand argued that having arisen in large corporations, Six Sigma is surely one of the most comprehensive approaches for company development and performance improvement of products and processes[3]. Nevertheless, it appears that the majority of SMEs either do not know the Six Sigma approach, or find its organisation not suitable to meet their specific requirements. For many large corporations like General Electric, Six Sigma has become the centre of nearly every business activity, and a very important step to ensure long-term competitiveness. In today’s highly competitive environment, it is also becoming increasingly important for SMEs.  Wessel & Burcher (2004) suggested ten imperatives towards a general SME

six sigma concept that includes:

 


[1] Source: Brassard et al. (1994), The Six Sigma Memory Jogger II, 1st Edition, GOAL/QPC, NH, USA.

[2] Tony Fouweather, Shirley Coleman1 & Andrew Thomas (2006), Six sigma training programmes to help SMEs improve, 2nd I*PROMS Virtual International Conference 3–14 July 2006, Pages 39-44.

[3]Godecke Wessel & Peter Burcher (2004), Six Sigma for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, The TQM Magazine, Volume 16, Number 4, pp. 264-272.

 

§  Every single project within the SME has to contribute positively and directly to the company’s bottom line, calculated through full costing.

§  Large corporations routinely track project results for 12 months – this should be maintained in an SME environment.

§  Six sigma programmes for SMEs should strictly focus on those projects which fulfil the first two imperatives to ensure optimum value levelling and resource allocation to projects in line with company strategy.

§  Training programme has to be employed which is significantly shorter than in large corporations, but is still based in the well-proven methods and tools adjusted to specific SME needs.

§  SMEs should carry out a one-day awareness raising programme to facilitate the cultural implementation element of a six sigma programme and to encourage active support of, and participation in, organisational improvement.

§  The six sigma roles should be restricted to the project leaders in the SME organisation (e.g. an “SME black belt”). The rest of the workforce and management staff should only participate in the awareness training.

§  Elements should be designed to support the cultural implementation in a detailed six sigma strategy, incorporating well-proven change management methods and tools, tailored to the specific needs of SMEs.

§  Fundamental elements of process management should be incorporated into the six sigma programme, tailored to the specific needs of the target groups.

§  SMEs require consulting services which differ significantly from those usually found in the marketplace working for larger corporations.

§  A general six sigma concept for SMEs needs to be adjusted to the core requirements of ISO 9000 to enable a certification, which represents a major difference to Six Sigma programmes in large corporations.

 

 

Anthony et al. (2005) emphasized that due to growing importance of supply chain management issues in global market environment; large firms are heavily dependent on SMEs for
sat

the provision of high quality products and/or services at low costs[1]. The increasing demand for high quality products and highly capable business processes by large organisations has left no choice on the SMEs to consider the introduction of six sigma business strategy. Anthony et al. (2005) embarked on a mission to identify the reasons SMEs are not implementing six sigma. Figure above illustrates the common reasons SMEs gave. The most important reason is that companies do not know about Six Sigma (35 percent), this is followed by the insufficiency of resources (26 percent). Also, those companies that already have quality system in place perceive such systems to be adequate (20 percent).

      Typically there are three main elements in the application of Six Sigma, namely, the Six Sigma Culture (more precisely, structure), the methodology and finally the selection of tools within Six Sigma.  In order for a SME to successfully implement the Six Sigma approach in their organisation, they must implement the Six Sigma culture appropriately within their organisational structure, then apply the Six Sigma methodology appropriately and then apply the relevant tools within Six Sigma that would have major impacts to the bottom line of the company but by utilising minimum amount of resources.



[1] Jiju Antony, Maneesh Kumar & Christian N. Madu (2005), Six sigma in small - and medium - sized UK manufacturing enterprises: Some empirical observations, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 860-874


 

  Posted by Admin at 10:19 | Today | Comments( 602 )



 Wednesday, June 13, 2007


Six sigma and the government

 

It's so funny how I came across this article after I've had a meeting with a senior executive in a government agency regading the application of six sigma to ensure they achieve their set KPIs.  The executive was so excited of how six sigma can help him define his problems and provide permanent solutions.  He agreed on a date for us to have a review with department heads to identify project areas. However, 2 days later come back to tell us that the management thinks that Six Sigma is too high-tech for them.

It amazes me how most of the senior management in government agencies function.  I have to say that this does not apply to all of them.  I have been doing work with more than a handful of them that relies on informative data in their decision making.  These are very good government officers.

But what is mentioned in the article below is a typical environment in any government agencies - wastages everywhere.  Sad thing is when consultants like us point it out - the common answer would be we've been doing that way for so long so it's difficult to change.  Expenditure on IT has increased tremendously in government agencies, however, the usage of informative data in decision making is still very pathethic.  We keep seeing repeated mistakes, errors, incidents and same corrective action deployed repeatedly.  Does anybody ever question the effectiveness of those actions or is it a culture that as long as something is being done about it - IT'S RESOLVED?

Six Sigma have been utilized by corporations and government agencies overseas to resolve problems, to operate in a leaner environment, to achieve maximum value for budgets why are we not there yet?  I am not saying that Six Sigma is the only way to go ----BUT at least it is a structured methodology to follow to ensure things are being done. 

I've been helping big corporations with their Six Sigma deployment and have seen unbelievable results.  My wish is for me to open the government sector's eyes to the value that it could bring them.

Enjoy the article.........

_____________________________________

 

Want to hear a joke about waste in government? Here goes: A guy stops at a gas station and, after filling his tank, buys a soda and stands next to his car to drink it. Nearby, two men are working alongside the road, repeating the same process over and over. The first man digs a hole two or three feet deep and then moves on. The other man comes along behind him and fills in the hole. After a few minutes of watching this curious behavior, the man with the soda walks up and asks what the workers are doing.

“Well, we work for the government, and we’re just doing our jobs,” they reply.

“But one of you is digging a hole and the other fills it up,” the man says. “You’re not accomplishing anything. Aren’t you wasting the taxpayer’s money?”

“You don’t understand,” says the first worker. “Normally there are three of us: me, Elmer and Leroy. I dig the hole, Elmer sticks the tree in and Leroy here puts the dirt back. Elmer’s job’s been cut, so now it’s just me and Leroy.”

These kinds of jokes are ubiquitous, and they’re funny because, unfortunately, they contain a grain of truth. Historically, government hasn’t been a model of efficiency, innovation or nimbleness. But, as Bob Dylan sings, the times, they are a-changin’.

Six Sigma has proven its worth to the manufacturing industry, causing the education, health care and service industries to sit up and take note. Governments, though, have been slower to respond to the methodology’s potential. This is understandable. Governments, whether local or federal, have huge and entrenched bureaucracies, and they lack the all-important market incentive for change. Waste in governmental processes is usually hidden in masses of paperwork, behind bureaucrats who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. The predictable result has been more of the same in municipalities across the country.

But that’s beginning to change. Governments have taken note of the dramatic successes the manufacturing industry has enjoyed with Six Sigma, and an increasing number are implementing Six Sigma programs of their own. Implementing Six Sigma within government bureaucracies brings challenges that are specific to the public sector. Chief among these are reluctant employees and a lack of available funding for the necessary training. But those hesitant employees are often more easily convinced than their manufacturing counterparts that Six Sigma can work. There’s little of the “been there, done that” attitude that some private-sector employees have about yet another quality program.

The benefits of Six Sigma are often more prominent in local municipalities, but whether local or federal, the results are impressive.

In the Navy
Until three years ago, the U.S. Navy had annual cost increases of 5 to 10 percent of its budget, a situation that was unsustainable even for the military. The organization’s structure lacked effective internal communications, especially among its 32 maintenance facilities spread around the country.

“It was a stovepipe design, in which each of the depots was operating on its own,” says Captain Fred E. Cleveland, executive officer of the NAVAIR Depot in San Diego. “It wasn’t very efficient.”

The tide turned three years ago with the formation of the Naval Aviation Enterprise, which joined together the Navy’s labyrinthine management structures, and the subsequent implementation of a host of Six Sigma, theory of constraints (TOC) and lean projects. In August 2004, the Navy launched Task Force Lean, an initiative designed to support lean projects in the Navy’s NAVSEA command structure. This initiative also established a Lean Office, which is staffed full time.

The Navy commissioned three consulting firms to train its officers in Six Sigma, and plans to award Green and Black Belts in several rounds this year. There was a workshop on continuous improvement held in August 2004, attended by representatives from NAVSEA headquarters, warfare centers, shipyards and maintenance centers. Navy leaders in Washington, D.C., recently announced a new requirement that its commanding officers, executive officers, department heads, command master chiefs and senior enlisted advisors must complete lean Six Sigma and TOC training, noting that it will probably extend the requirement to other personnel as well.

In the three years since its implementation, lean, Six Sigma and TOC have had a huge effect on the NAVAIR Depot in San Diego. The depot employs 3,200 people and is charged with maintaining maritime aircraft between deployments, a task that requires it to maintain very specific schedules. Last year, the department refurbished 100 of the Navy’s F/A-18 Hornets and Super Hornets, as well as dozens of EA-CB Prowlers, E-2 Hawkeyes, S-3 Vikings and others--a total of 245 aircraft. NAVAIR’s innovative management program, Airspeed, has helped drive costs down to the point where the average cost for an hour of work on one of its sophisticated aircraft--including engineering and logistical support--is only $77, according to NAVAIR materials. Contrast this to local automotive repair shops that charge an average of $90 an hour.

Value-stream mapping and TOC studies showed Cleveland and other North Island Depot executives that there were serious bottlenecks in its production schedules, and that cycle times could be dramatically reduced. New, more efficient processes allowed high-tech fighter jets maintained at the facility to be completely refurbished in 134 days, instead of 192.

“That’s millions and millions of dollars that we’ve saved,” Cleveland says. “It’s really working well.”

The Naval Aviation Enterprise now meets regularly to share best practices--another product of the lean Six Sigma initiative, according to Cleveland.

“The Navy’s consumption [of re sources] is huge, but we’ve never com pared which departments and squadrons were consuming more or less because we’d never compared them like that before,” he says. “The meetings allow us to efficiently spread the word about how other squadrons are performing tasks, and to learn how we might do them better, at lower costs.”

Some results of Airspeed at the San Diego NAVAIR Depot include:

3- to 5-percent reduction in operations costs, consistent with industry standards

Opportunity costs were recovered as a result of cutting work-in-progress from 31 Hornets to 19 and returning 12 Hornets (one squadron) to fleet flight operations

Increased efficiency allows the depot to invest 8,000 hours per jet in 134 days compared to 6,000 hours in 192 days.

Work is accomplished faster, with fewer people and requiring a smaller inventory of costly spare parts.

 

Government mimics business
That governments are starting to mimic manufacturing industry quality systems comes as no surprise to Mikel Harry, whom some call the “Father of Six Sigma.” Along with engineer Bill Smith, Harry developed Six Sigma at Motorola in the early 1980s. Since then, he’s had calls from governments all over the world interested in implementing the methodology.

Harry has met with government officials from the United States, India, South Korea, Japan, Australia and Singapore to discuss implementing Six Sigma processes in everything from water quality and distribution, to electricity production, to state-run education systems.

“The question these agencies are asking is, ‘How can we shape the national agenda to support the corporate enterprise of our nation?’” Harry says. “‘How do we make our nation more attractive to businesses, more competitive?’ They see Six Sigma as a way to enhance the government to make it work more like a business, which is good for everyone.”

Harry has done extensive consulting with the federal government about the possibility of using Six Sigma to enhance U.S. intelligence gathering in the war on terrorism. Though prevented from discussing the possibilities, Harry has said previously that unleashing the discipline of Six Sigma into intelligence gathering would be very beneficial.

Outside of the profit-driven private sector, Six Sigma’s goals shift from making and saving money to improving cycle time. Many nonprofits realize significant cost savings after implementing Six Sigma, but that is more a result of improved cycle times and efficient supply-chain management than separate effects of their own.

“Governments don’t exist to make money, so in a way, it doesn’t matter to them what they do, as long as their costs are reduced,” Harry says. “Supply-chain management is essentially the same for government as it is for industry. For government, the goal is cycle time improvement.”

Fixing potholes and processes
Fort Wayne, Indiana, is one of the first major U.S. cities to roll out Six Sigma. Mayor Graham Richard, elected to the position in 1999, had long been familiar with quality improvement. In 1991, while serving as a state senator, Richard helped start the TQM Network, a group of small to midsized companies that used benchmarks to improve their processes. Most of these companies were suppliers to General Electric, a company that famously enjoyed success with Six Sigma. GE’s suppliers in the TQM Network took note, and many of them implemented Six Sigma programs of their own, Richard says. When he became mayor, those successes were still fresh in his mind.

Fort Wayne’s official Six Sigma implementation began in February 2000, with the establishment of an executive council that would serve as a deployment team. Division and department managers attended a two-day training session on the basics of Six Sigma, and Richard created the position of quality enhancement manager, appointing the city’s first Black Belt to fill it. Soon after, five more city employees went through Black Belt training, and a member of the city’s executive council started developing Green Belt training.

Richard says he knew that there would be some “head scratching” among city employees when he introduced the methodology. The city’s first Six Sigma projects, permitting and pothole repair, were chosen for this reason because they were high profile and would provide noticeable results for Fort Wayne’s 250,000 residents. Both were problem areas: Before Six Sigma, it took an average of 50 days to get a city building permit, and it took up to four days for city workers to fill the many dangerous potholes that form on the city’s roads. Of course, before Six Sigma no one in the city’s offices knew these statistics, as no one had ever collectively examined them.

Richard’s goal was to get potholes fixed within 24 hours of their reporting. “Everyone thought I was crazy,” Richard remembers. “Everyone said, ‘You’ll never make it.’” Black Belts mapped the locations of potholes, finding the areas of the city where they happened most often and concentrated their efforts there. Today, most potholes are fixed within four hours after they’re reported.

In addition, Black Belts used flowcharts and maps to highlight redundancies in the city’s permitting system and slashed the amount of time it takes to issue a permit from 50 days to just 11 or 12.

The trick, Richard says, is for public agencies to institutionalize the notion that they are service providers, not bureaucrats.

“When you remember that fact, you’re telling people that you’re there to provide a service, just as anyone in the public sector would,” he says. “People don’t think of government as a business, but they should. We’re one of the biggest service organizations in the area.”

The often-substantial cost of Six Sigma training can be a deterrent to its successful implementation--especially for smaller companies and governments--but Richard found an innovative way to provide it. He used his connections with the TQM Network to have experienced Black Belts provide training, and then reached a deal with Six Sigma giants Raytheon and ITT to allow city workers to attend internal Six Sigma training sessions. A TQM Network Master Black Belt, Roger Hirt, served as a mentor to Fort Wayne’s fledging Six Sigma practitioners, and also offered Green Belt training.

Richard estimates that the training could have cost the city $50,000 per Black Belt, but it totaled less than a tenth of that sum.

In just five years, Six Sigma has revolutionized Fort Wayne’s city government. City workers have completed 60 Six Sigma projects, which have saved upward of $10 million, and there are now 35 Six Sigma belts on the staff. Fort Wayne’s school district is now implementing Six Sigma, and the city gets monthly requests for information from other public administrators interested in modeling Fort Wayne’s success in their own cities.

Fort Wayne’s Six Sigma-facilitated improvements include:

Variation elimination and bottleneck reduction, allowing the fire department inspectors to perform 23 percent more reinspections annually, without any staff increases.

Parks department workers, led by a Six Sigma Black Belt, designed an experiment to determine if city trees were trimmed at the right frequencies, reducing complaint calls from citizens by 33 percent.

Improved accounting in the transportation engineering department freed $150,000 that had previously been tied up due to inaccurate estimations of project costs.

On-the-job injuries have plummeted to one of the lowest rates in the country.

Cost-saving incentives are important to innovative employees, and in private firms, they often come in the form of cash bonuses. Because the city doesn’t have the money to provide them, Richard and his quality council provide “prizes” in the form of laptop computers and other useful tools for departments that save significant amounts of money for the city.

With governments getting smarter about quality and trimming their processes with lean precision, we may soon see the day when private-sector companies look for new executives in city halls and government buildings--and many of those executives will bring with them a fundamental understanding of the benefits that Six Sigma can deliver.

  Posted by Admin at 12:40 | Six Sigma | Comments( 658 )



 Monday, January 22, 2007


Six Sigma Black Belt Recruitment

LEAN SIX SIGMA BLACK BELT

(Selangor - Petaling Jaya)

Requirements:

  • Certified Lean Six Sigma Black Belt.
  • Experienced "Change Agent" with the ability to influence others.
  • Minimum 2 years experience leading process improvements.
  • Pharmaceutical/Petrochemical/Continuous Processing industry experience.
  • Excellent communication & leadership skills.
  • Strong knowledge of supply chain and ERP systems.
  • Familiar with statistical software applications.
  • Proficient with MS Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.)

Duties:

  • Identify and lead continuous improvement projects and Kaizens that deliver multi-million dollar financial results.
  • Train and mentor incoming Black Belts, Green Belts, and other associates on Lean & Six Sigma methodologies.
  • Apply Lean Six Sigma tools and concepts to make value stream improvements.
  • Lead multiple projects and Kaizens simultaneously while staying focused on priorities and the "Big Picture".
  • Utilize the DMAIC model to systematically improve business processes and sustain the gains.
  • Develop solutions specs that are data-driven and aimed at eliminating waste and variation.
  • Set clear measurable goals, get team commitment to those goals, monitor progress and ultimately achieve the goals.
  • Proactively challenge the "system" - support the evolution to a culture that is relentless about improvement.

Six Sigma Black Belts

(Selangor - Petaling Jaya)

What We Want You To Do?

  • Lead Six Sigma projects by applying and managing the company's process of Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control a project.
  • Actively lead teams and provide individual contibution in problem solving efforts on selected projects to improve quality, reduce cost and improve cycle time, scrap, rework, etc.
  • Identify and work to remove bariers that slow or prevent the successful attainment of process/productivity improvement and administrative eficiency that will lead to cost reduction and competitive analysis.
  • Achieve proficiency and a natural working habit of using Six Sigma methods.
  • Champion change and innovation.
  • Train/coach green belts or black belts curiculum.

Who Are We Looking For?

You must have :

  • At least a Bachelor's Degree, Professional Degree in Engineering field, preferably a MBA graduate or is currently pursuing a course in MBA though not a must.
  • 5 - 7 years of relevant experience with a "Fortune 500" company in manufacturing environment/operations.
  • Completed minimum 5 projects with minimum of 5 million savings.
  • Capable of utilizing Six Sigma First Time Quality methods and managing teams of 30 - 40 people to move organization through process quality maturity framework.
  • Having experience of coaching green belts.
  • Able to foster good interpersonal relationship with outstanding negotiation,analytical and problem solving skills.
  • Results-oriented with capability to work effectively and innovatively.
  • Strong communication and presentation skills, fluent in English.
  • Willingness to travel as some official out-station trips may be necessary.

Interested ?

Send your application, complete with photograph to :-

 

GENAXIS Sdn Bhd
Unit E-907, Level 9
Pusat Dagangan Phileo Damansara I
Off Jalan Damansara
46350 Petaling Jaya
Selangor Darul Ehsan

Fax: 03-7960 0032

E-mail: izam@genaxis.com.my
Website: www.genaxis.com.my

 

Only shortlised candidates will be notified.

  Posted by Admin at 14:56 | Six Sigma | Comments( 630 )



Main Menu

Home
About
Log in


Calendar
‹‹ November 2008 ››
W Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
44 1 2
45 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
46 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
47 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
48 24 25 26 27 28 29 30


  



Recent posts
What is Six Sigma?...
Six Sigma in Small and Me...
Six sigma and the governm...
Six Sigma Black Belt Recr...


Categories
General
Six Sigma
Today



       
Six Sigma Solutions
 
 

Copyright© 2005 Six Sigma Solutions. All rights reserved. Best Viewed With IE5