Chap 4 TQM Techniques PDF
Chap 4 TQM Techniques PDF
Chap 4 TQM Techniques PDF
CREATIVE
ADAPTATIO
N
Thus, the goal of benchmarking is to make the best in class target for the organization,
based on the information from both internal and external sources. The secret to
benchmarking technique is borrow adopt refine the best attributes for
continuous growth and development.
When Benchmarking?
C. Strategic Benchmarking:
Examines how companies compute and seeks the winning strategies that have
led to competitive advantage and market success.
Determine how well a company is prepared to compete in a segment and to
help define a best-in-class competitor is to construct a key success factor
(KSF).
Phases of Benchmarking:
Phase 1: Planning
1. Identify what to benchmark;
2. Identify comparative companies;
3. Determine data collection method & collect data.
Phase 2: Analysis
4. Determine current performance gap;
5. Project future performance levels.
Phase 3: Integration
6. Communicate finding and gain acceptance;
7. Establish functional goals.
Phase 4: Action
8. Develop action plans;
9. Implement specific actions & monitor progress;
10. Recalibrate benchmarks.
Phase 5: Maturity
11. Attain leadership position
12. Fully integrate practices into processes.
These 4 questions formed the basis on which Boeing, Digital equipments company,
Motorola and Xerox jointly developed a benchmarking template.
Outputs, Results, Sources Factors
Benchmarks Who/What
WHAT is BEST
Data Collection
Organizations that benchmark, adapt the process to best fit their own needs and
culture. Although the number of steps in the process may vary from organization to
Organization, the following SEVEN steps contain the core method of bench marking:
1. Most organizations have a strategy that defines how the firm wants to position
it and compete in the market place. This strategy is usually expressed in terms
of mission and vision statements. Supporting these statements is set of critical
activities, which the organization must to successfully to realize its vision.
They are often referred to as critical success factors. In general, when deciding
what to benchmark, it is best to begin by thinking about the mission and
critical success factors.
7. Monitor the entire process and find out the key areas where more
improvement is needed and finally document the final results.
1. Determine who the clients are who will use the 1. Identify what is to be benchmark
2. Advance the clients from the literacy stage to the 2. Identify comparative organizations
champion stage
3. Test the environment. Make sure the clients can and 3. Determine data collection method and
will follow through with benchmarking findings collect data.
4. Determine urgency panic or disinterest indicates little 4. Determine current performance Gap.
5. Determine scope and type of benchmark needed 5. Project future performance levels.
6. Select and prepare the team 6. Communicate B.M findings and gain
acceptance
planning process
progress
Advantages:
Disadvantages:
The most resistant criticism of Benchmarking comes from the idea of copying others.
BM is not a panacea. It is not a strategy nor is it intended to be a business philosophy.
Therefore, it is a time taking technique.
Conclusion
Now a days, more than 60% companies in the world uses this technique for fixing their target
for continuous improvement. For them it is an important tool. But to be effective it must be
used properly. It breaks down (waste money, time and energy and some times morale too) if
process owners and managers feel threatened or do not accept and act on the findings. Finally,
benchmarking is not a substitute for innovation; however, it is a source of ideas from outside
the organization.
Kaizen:
Kai the Japanese word means change, while Zen means good (for the better), so kaizen
means improvement. It is an effective tool of continuous improvement in small increments that
make the process more efficient, effective, under control and adaptable. It focuses on
simplification by breaking down complex processes into their sub processes and then
improving them. Massaki Imai, the chairman of the Cambridge Corporation, an international
management consultancy firm based in Tokyo, propound this useful technique in 1986.
Kaizen relies heavily on a culture change that encourages suggestions by operators who
continuously try to incrementally improve their jobs or processes.
Now, improvements in industry can be obtained in many ways: new technology can
bring improvement to a process or to products' quality - technology can also bring
improvements in productivity and in efficiency - it can also bring improvements to
customer service - external consultants can bring improvements to working methods,
to processes, to interpersonal relations. But these types of improvements do not fall
under the Kaizen umbrella.
Kaizen is improvement through the poor man approach: the poor man does not spend
money on improvements because he has no money to throw at it - he rather uses his
wisdom, and his brain, and his creativity, and his talent, and his patience....
This is the real power of Kaizen: by using their brain to obtain improvements, people
perfect their skills and increase even more their talent. And there is an extra benefit:
they are more satisfied. If you are a wealthy man, and build a sumptuous villa
designed by the best architect in town, you may or may not be as satisfied as the
average man who, through years of patient, creative work has transformed his house
into a cosy, warm nest, filled with handmade decorations, each corner showing his
dedication, each ornamental object purchased through intelligent savings but selected
with care and rich in taste, and each detail showing and proving his love...... Each step
of improvement, once completed, brings satisfaction, but probably the real
satisfaction is in the improvement process itself: because improving mainly or
primarily through creative efforts is a tough challenge, and challenge is a wonderful
source of satisfaction.
Surely, brain alone is not sufficient: specific techniques are available for Kaizen
oriented people to perform effectively. Like a home improver needs to know
sufficiently about interior decorating, and antiques' restoration, and soft furnishing
(and landscaping, painting, plumbing, wallpapering......), similarly the industrial
Kaizen improver needs:
To know about problem-solving techniques, and tools for creativity, and
Pareto and Ishikawa Diagrams (to mention but a few of the available
instruments for systematic improvement).
Valid Kaizen requires an extra skill from people: the ability to work
effectively in team. Starting from the assumption that "the Pope and the
Peasant together know more than the Pope alone", the Japanese have
extensively deployed and mastered the "team" concept for real, methodical
improvement.
Their Quality Circles, for instance, are known world-wide.
Kaizen Sheet:
A kaizen sheet is a useful way of depicting the information relating to the
implementation of a kaizen suggested by an individual or a group of workers.
Gemba Kaizen:
One major tool of Gemba Kaizen is Muda Elimination. Various types of muda are as
follows:
Muda of Processing
Muda Muda
For of
Over Production Transportation
Safety
Security
High productivity
Quality
Commitment and partnership
Cost effectiveness in entire business environment
Team concept and ownership
The famous Taj Hotels (Rs. 687 crore India Hotels Corporation Ltd) belong to the
TATA group. The Taj Hotels chain is ranked amongst the best three hotel chains in
Asia, but the aim is to be among the top chains in the world. Over the past three years,
the group has institutionalized both the kaizen approach and total productive
maintenance. Sr. vice president (corporate quality) Mr. H.N.Shrinivas, personally
visited the worlds leading hotel chains such as the Ritz Carlton (Marriott group) and
four seasons to pick up the best practices.
The Taj group benchmarked with Ritz Carlton on customer satisfaction measurement
in luxury hotels. It has also adopted its three steps to service philosophy which is
used for defining performance requirements of employees at all levels warm
welcome, anticipatory, service, and farewell.
According to Taj Hotels, three functions should happen simultaneously within any
organization maintenance, innovation, and kaizen. Maintenance refers to
maintaining the current status, where procedures are set and the standard standards
implemented. Innovation refers to breakthrough activities initiated by top
management, buying new machines, new equipments, developing new markets,
directing R & D, change of strategy etc. In the middle, there is kaizen, small steps but
continuining improvements without large capital investments. Kaizen should be
implemented by the staff at all levels with encouragement and direction from the
management. Taj Hotels follow the ten basic tips for kaizen implementation:
A company will fail it its people have Lets stop here, Hold performance at this
level, or We have done enough attitude. Therefore, it is important to build
awareness of Kaizen as a continuous process through out the company; use the
Kaizen strategy as management tool within the TQM movement.
Quality Circle
Historical Background and why an organisation should
institutionalise this concept
From the early 1950's, Japanese learnt from the seed courses of Dr. E.
Deming's on statistical methods for quality control and Dr. J. Juran's
courses on Quality Management. With zeal for learning and self-
sufficiency, they vigorously promoted quality education by local experts
across their country. It began with massive education of engineers,
and then top and middle managers, supervisory levels.
Therefore quality circle is nothing but a small group of employees who come
together to discuss with the management issues related to either quality
control or improvement in production methods form a Quality Control Circle
(QCC). These employees usually work in the same areas, and voluntarily
meet on a regular basis to identify, analyze and solve their problems.
It is said that 95% of the problems in workshops can be solved through quality
control tools. The Japanese have experienced this! The quality control tools
useful for QCCs are Pareto Diagrams, Cause-and-Effect Diagrams,
Stratification, Check Sheets, Histograms, Scatter Diagrams, Graphs and
Control Charts. Also, logical thinking and experience are a must for solving
problems. Therefore the main objectives of QC are:
To improve quality and productivity.
To reduce the cost of products or services by waste reduction, safety,
effective utilization of resources, avoiding unnecessary errors and
defects.
To identify and solve work-related problems and interfere with
production as a team.
To tap the creative intelligence of people working in the org. and make
full use of human resources.
To improve communication within the organization.
To improve employees loyalty and commitment to the organization and
its goals. (Promoting Morale of employees)
To build a happy, bright, meaningful work environment.
To satisfy the human needs of recognition, achievement and self
development
Usually QCC programs must operate in all sections of the company i.e., in the
offices, service operations and manufacturing. But remember, while the size
of the company is not important to a program's success, the following factors
certainly are:
Voluntary participation.
Management support.
Employee empowerment.
Training programs.
Team work.
Problem solving skills.
Conclusion:
y Inadequate Training
y Unsure of Purpose
y Not truly Voluntary
y Lack of Management Interest
y Quality Circles are not really empowered to make decisions.
y Too many suggestions.
QUALITY FUCNTION DEPLOYMENT (QFD):
Introduction:
QFD is a technique used to carry the voice of the customer through design and the
production process. It is actually, a customer driven planning process to guide the
design, manufacturing and marketing of goods. It tries to eliminate the gap between:
What customer want in a new product and what the product must deliver. QFD is
designed to help planners focus on characteristics of a new or existing product or
service from the viewpoints of customer/market segments, company, or technology-
development needs.
QFD was originated at Bridgestone Tyre, Kurume plant, where the quality chart was
used for the first time in 1966. Dr. Mizuno, professor of the Tokyo Institute of
Technology, is credited with initiating the Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
system. The first application of QFD was at Mitsubishi, Heavy Industries Ltd., in the
Kobe Shipyard, Japan, in 1972. Professor Yogi Akao (Asahi University, Tokyo) has
been credited with developing this technique to the present form. QFD was
successfully implemented by Mini Vans by Toyota in 1977.
Quality function deployment (QFD) was originally developed by Yoji Akao in 1966
when the author combined his work in quality assurance and quality control points
with function deployment used in Value Engineering. Mr. Akao described QFD as a
method to transform user demands into design quality, to deploy the functions
forming quality, and to deploy methods for achieving the design quality into
subsystems and component parts, and ultimately to specific elements of the
manufacturing process.
QFD is a structured method in which CRs are translated into appropriate Technical
Descriptors / specifications for every stage of product development and production. It
is a technique consisting of a series of interlocking Matrices that translates customer
need into product and process characters.
Therefore, QFD is a technique used to carry the voice of the customer through design
and the production process. It is actually, a customer driven planning process to
guide the design, manufacturing and marketing of goods. It tries to eliminate the gap
between what customer want in a new product and what the product must deliver.
Purpose of QFD
The main purpose of QFD is to ensure that CRs are incorporated into every aspects of
the design and production process. However, in 1987, the QFD research group of the
Japanese Society of Quality Control (JSQC) led by Akao published a final survey
report on the status of QFD application among 80 Japanese companies. The
companies surveyed listed the following as the purpose o using QFD:
The structure of the QFD is based on a set of Matrices. The main matrix
relates CRs (WHAT) and their corresponding technical requirements (HOW)
The primary planning tool used in QFD is the House of Quality. The house of
quality translates the voice of the customer into design requirements that meet
specific values. It also matches those requirements against the ability of the
organization to meet them. The basic structure of QFD can be thought of as a
framework of a house like:
1. Identifying the Customer and determining Customer Requirements: Who
is the customer? In addition to the person buying the product, the customers of the
design engineer would also include the manufacturing and assembly engineers and
workers. (or anyone else downstream of the design process). The goal is to
develop a list of all the customer requirements (made up in the customers own
words) that will affect the design. This should be accomplished with the whole
design team, based on the results of customer surveys.
y The interior walls of the house are the relationships between customer
requirements and technical descriptors.
y Customer expectations ( customer requirements) are translated into
engineering characteristics ( technical descriptors)
QFD was originally implemented to reduce start up costs. Organizations using QFD
have reported a reduced product development time. For example US car
manufacturers of the late 1980s and early 1990s needed an average of 5 years to put a
product on the market, from drawing board to showroom, where as Honda put a new
product on the market in two and a half years and Toyota did it in 3 years. Both
organizations credit this reduced time to the use of QFD. Product quality and ,
consequently, customer satisfaction improve with QFD due to numerous factors
depicted in following:
1. When an organization decides to implement QFD, the project manager and team members
need to be able to commit to form small team and significant time to it, especially in the early
stage.
2. Priorities of the project must be inform to all departments within the organization, so team
members can budget their time accordingly.
3. Formation of two teams designing a new product or improving existing products (Team
members are from marketing, design, quality, finance and production).
4. Periodic team meetings
5. Inter team communication and feedback
6. Improve the quality as well (fulfil the customer requirements)
Application of QFD:
The first application of QFD was at Mitsubishi, Heavy industries Ltd. in the Kobe Shipyard, Japan in
1972. After 4 years of case study development refinement, and training, QFD was successfully
implemented in the production of mini vans by Toyota. Using 1977 as a base , a 20% reduction is
start up costs was reported in the launch of the new van in October 1979, a 38% reduction by Nov.1982
and a cumulative 61% reduction by April 1984. QFD was first introduced in the United States in 1984
by Dr. Clausing of Xerox. QFD can be applied to practically any manufacturing or service industry. It
has become a standard practices by most leading organizations, who also require it of other suppliers.
Conclusion:
Because QFD concentrates on customer expectations and needs, a considerable amount of efforts is put
into research to determine customer expectations. This process increases the initial planning stage of
the project definition phase in the development cycle. But the result is a total reduction of the overall
cycle time in bringing to the market a product that satisfies the customer.
The driving force behind QFD is that the customer dictates the attributes of a product. Customer
satisfaction, like quality, is defined as meeting or exceeding customer expectations. Words used by the
customers to describe their expectations are often referred to as the voice of the customer .
Sources for the determining customer expectations are focus groups, surveys, complaints, consultants,
standards and federal regulations. Frequently, customers expectations are vague and general in nature.
It is the job of the QFD team to analyze these customers expectations into more specific customer
requirements. Customer requirements must be taken literally and not incorrectly translated into what
organization officials desire.
QFD begins with marketing to determine what exactly the customer desires from a product. During the
collection of information, the QFD team must continually ask and answer numerous questions, such as:
Finally, the goal of QFD is not only to meet as many customer expectations and needs as possible,
but also to exceed customers expectations.
In 1990, two Americans, James Champy and Michael Hammer presented the idea
of business process reengineering. They coined the word: Business Process
Reengineering (BPR) in their famous book Reengineering the corporation
published in 1993.
What is BPR?
According to Michael Hammer, Reengineering has been defined as the
fundamental rethinking and radical design of business processes to achieve dramatic
or break through improvement in critical contemporary measures of performance such
as Cost, Quality, Service and Speed.
COST
QUALITY
SERVICE
Therefore, Business Process Reengineering or process reengineering, or simply
reengineering is focused on break through improvement to dramatically improve the
quality and speed of work and to reduce its cost by fundamentally changing the
processes by which works get done.
Hammer states that B.P may be defined as a set of logically related task to achieve a
defined business outcome. A set of process forms a business system the way in which
a business unit or a collection of units carries out its business. Requirement of
Reengineering process are:
Rethink Redesign
Measurement Continuous
And Improvement
Control
Retool
Assuming that a company has decided that its processes are ineffective and inefficient
the following are the major steps the company should embark on to redesign its
process:
Impacts:
Benefits of Reengineering:
Limitations:
Michael Hammer argues that the two concepts are compatible and actually
complement each other. Both concepts have the same focus customer satisfaction
1. Breakdown maintenance:
3. Autonomous Maintenance:
4.Productive Maintenance:
STAGE C - IMPLEMENTATION
In this stage eight activities are carried which are called eight pillars
in the development of TPM activity.
Of these four activities are for establishing the system for
production efficiency, one for initial control system of new products
and equipment, one for improving the efficiency of administration
and are for control of safety, sanitation as working environment.
By all there activities one would has reached maturity stage. Now is
the time for applying for PM award. Also think of challenging level to
which you can take this movement.
Policy:
1. Preparation of employees.
2. Initial cleanup of machines.
3. Take counter measures
4. Fix tentative JH standards
5. General inspection
6. Autonomous inspection
7. Standardization and
8. Autonomous management.
"Kai" means change, and "Zen" means good ( for the better ).
Basically kaizen is for small improvements, but carried out on a
continual basis and involve all people in the organization. Kaizen is
opposite to big spectacular innovations. Kaizen requires no or little
investment. The principle behind is that "a very large number of
small improvements are move effective in an organizational
environment than a few improvements of large value. This pillar is
aimed at reducing losses in the workplace that affect our
efficiencies. By using a detailed and thorough procedure we
eliminate losses in a systematic method using various Kaizen tools.
These activities are not limited to production areas and can be
implemented in administrative areas as well.
Kaizen Target:
1. Problem analysis
2. (Root cause ) Why - Why analysis
3. Summary of losses
4. Kaizen register
5. Kaizen summary sheet.
Policy :
Target :
Policy :
Target :
Policy:
Target:
Target :
1. Zero accident,
2. Zero health damage
3. Zero fires.
1. Processing loss
2. Cost loss including in areas such as procurement, accounts,
marketing, sales leading to high inventories
3. Communication loss
4. Idle loss
5. Set-up loss
6. Accuracy loss
7. Office equipment breakdown
8. Communication channel breakdown, telephone and fax lines
9. Time spent on retrieval of information
10. Non availability of correct on line stock status
11. Customer complaints due to logistics
12. Expenses on emergency dispatches/purchases
Conclusion:
The concept of a culture of leaders may seem strange at first glance. Yet
one of the things that Six Sigma does is empower individuals throughout
the organization to develop individual leadership skills and capabilities.
This is accomplished through projects that teach them to gather data,
analyze them, and as a part of a team, determine the best course of action
for the company to follow to enhance performance.
Six Sigma pioneer Motorola started the program in 1987. It took five full
year to see significant results of six sigma. Motorola attributes 15 billion
dollars in savings over the past 11 years to Six Sigma. In 1997, General
electric (GE) invested 380 million US dollars in Six Sigma mostly for
trainings, and in the same year GE received 700 million US dollars in
documented benefits from creased productivity.
The basic of Six sigma quality initiative, very briefly, means going from
approximately 35,000 defects per million operations, which is average for
most companies, including GE, to fewer than four defects per million in
every element in every processes that this company engages in every day.
To reduce variation.
To solving the problems in scientific manner.
Six Sigma places an emphasis on the DMAIC approach (define, measure,
analyze, improve, and control) to problem solving.
To develop the bottom line responsibilities towards continuous improvement.
Organizations using Six Sigma often utilize teams that are assigned well-
defined projects with a direct impact on the bottom line.
To create importance on Business level strategy
Upper management typically supports Six Sigma as a key of business strategy.
Achieving Six Sigma is not easy it requires serious commitment in the form of time,
effort, and resources. For a company to be successful, such commitment must come
first from the top executive leadership of the organization and must be practiced by
everyone.
Improved performance does not and will not happen automatically. High-caliber
training is required. Disciplined implementation must follow, and people at all levels
have to change the way they go about doing their jobs. In short, new ways of thinking,
communicating, and operating must pervade the entire organization. You also need a
methodology. DMAIC and DFSS provide a structured problem solving roadmap and
tools towards obtaining the results you expect.
Six Sigma
The Seven
Magnificent
Quality Tools
Master black
belt Training Source / 100%
Inspection
The core elements of implementing Six Sigma training for Black Belts, Green Belts,
Yellow Belts, Ground School, Master Black Belt, Leading Six Sigma, RADD and
Senior Executive Six Sigma to deliver Six Sigma skills throughout your
organization.
This course is designed to enhance technical problem solving skills in line managers.
Participants will successfully complete a project while completing the classroom
portion of the training.
The Black Belt is a key change agent for the Six Sigma process. Typically the "best of
the best," these individuals lead teams working on chronic issues that are negatively
impacting the companys performance.
Typically, the entire Black Belt training investment can be justified by results from
the first project. The median return on each trained Black Belt is in and around
$100,000 per project.
The Program
For an example, Six Sigma Qualtec a premier Six Sigma Training Institute,
create a customized program to meet training needs.
Master Black Belt candidates are certified after completing their Super Project
and the required course work, both of which specifically address your
organizations goals. The training duration varies but includes 13-19 days of
instruction over a period of 6-12 months.
MBB candidates will mentor several individuals who are working on Six Sigma
projects or other problem solving efforts. Six Sigma instructors evaluate their
mentoring abilities using defined criteria to measure the breadth and
development of these skills. A positive evaluation will earn the candidate a
mentorship certification.
Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) is a rigorous approach to designing products and
services to meet customer expectations. Companies implementing Six Sigma find that
many defects are actually created during the design process. DFSS facilitates a
redesign of processes factoring in manufacturing and transactional capabilities from
the very beginning and ensures that end products are producible using existing
technology. Additionally, DFSS integrates the engineering and process design
functions enabling concurrent product and process design, thereby eliminating defects
before they can occur.
Integrating the principles of MAIC (Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) with design
tools and the IDEaS (Initiate, Design, Execute and Sustain process), the result is
product designs that consistently meet Six Sigma standards from inception.
Methodology:
Mention Six Sigma and you will hear folks refer to a mnemonic known as DMAIC.
DMAIC stands for Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. These steps
represent the five components of the Six Sigma improvement process.
Define. The key to the first step is for your team to ask: What is important?
What are the areas that you see as a chance to make an improvement that will
reach the organization's objectives and grant the greatest outcome? To do this,
use a SIPOC diagram. On a white board, write at the top Suppliers, Inputs,
Processes, Outcomes and Customers and under each heading define that aspect
of the process. Breaking down a process and its parts so everyone can see them
offers a good first step for gaining an objective appreciation of the process you
wish to improve.
Improve. The first three steps of the DMAIC process form the foundation for
asking what needs to be done. What are the possible solutions and how do we
execute the best one? Now that you have an informed perspective on the
process and potential problems, you are in a good position to assess various
solutions, evaluate their potential success and develop a sound implementation
plan.
Control. The final phase of the process involves an often forgotten and
misunderstood step in a change process. Once a solution has been implemented
and the data shows you are achieving the desired improvement, how do you
sustain the new level of performance? With confirmation in hand that your
improvement is effective, verifiable and reproducible, it's time to mesh the new
process into day-to-day operating practices. Doing so ensures that that the new
and improved process replaces its troubled predecessor. Only then will the
process truly be improved and the initial problem remains fixed.
For project QFD (Quality Prepare the Aim to Design for six
Implement function improvement increase of sigma (DFSS)
technique development) plan EBIT
set and (Earning
develop before
project interest and
plan tax)
Motorolas six sigma quality levels allow an off centring of the process up to 1.5
sigma. Table given below shows the number of defectives (parts per million) for
specified off-centring of the process and quality levels. Note that in the table the first
row shows the DPMO (Defects Per Million Opportunities), where there is no off-
centring of the process. At 3 sigma quality level, it shows the DPMO as 2700, while
at 6 sigma quality level the DPMO is 0.002, that is, 2 defects per billion. For an off-
centring of 1.5 sigma (row 7) and six sigma quality level, the DPMO is given as 3.4.
Thus, Motorola has quality level such that 3.4 defects per million are allowed.
For a process without off-centring, 3.4 defects per million lie somewhere between 4.5
and 5 sigma quality level. In row one (for zero off centring) , the 4.5 sigma quality
level has DPMO of 6.8, while 5 sigma quality level has DPMO 0.57. Thus the value
DPMO 3.4 lies somewhere between DPMO 0.57 and 6.8 (i.e between 4.5 and 5
sigma quality level with an off-centring of 1.5 sigma, in other words, they produce
66,803 defectives out of every million units produced. Thus, Motorola and GE have
made a quantum leap in quality enhancement.
Conclusion:
Defining a problem is the most critical part of the Six Sigma methodology. A problem
defined is a problem half-solved. We can dance around a problem as much as we
want, but if we don't define it properly, we will run around in circles, writing
corrective action reports and working on keeping people busy.
The distinctive feature of Six Sigma is its integrated approach. Jim has said that TQM
has evolved. Six Sigma takes all those tools that have been developed and integrates
them into a structured approach. We can use all those tools and define it as a
methodology and clarify the intent. Six Sigma requires aggressive goal setting. Six
Sigma is about innovation because we must learn to be intellectually engaged with
our processes.
Again, Six Sigma is like running, and TQM is like walking. Six Sigma is results-
oriented and learnable, and TQM is ill-defined, philosophy-driven and, overall, very
questionable. The methodology still needs to find a way to simplify and clarify its
approach so that people can do something with it. We need systems that are
performance-driven.
The fundamental difference is the intent. TQM is for incremental and continual
change, and Six Sigma represents rapid, radical and dramatic change through
innovation. It's not about behavioral or cultural change; it's about intellectual
engagement. The question is, how do you get people intellectually involved to drive
dramatic improvement? Tom Peters said that it's not difficult to learn new things;
what's difficult is forgetting old things. If you're having difficulty forgetting the old
method of TQM, then move beyond TQM to Six Sigma.
Six Sigma works; TQM has not worked. To summarize, Six Sigma is a TQM baseline
system powered by a new approach. Six Sigma has been the most successful
methodology to date in introducing corporate improvement. Six Sigma provides
focused, real-world results. Therefore, the main contrast between Six Sigma and TQM
are as follows:
A poka-yoke device is any mechanism that either prevents a mistake from being made
or makes the mistake obvious at a glance. The ability to find mistakes at a glance is
essential because, as Shingo writes, "The causes of defects lie in
worker errors, and defects are the results of neglecting those
errors. It follows that mistakes will not turn into defects if
worker errors are discovered and eliminated
beforehand"[Shingo 1986, p.50]. He later continues that "Defects arise
because errors are made; the two have a cause-and-effect relationship. ... Yet errors
will not turn into defects if feedback and action take place at the error stage"[Shingo,
1986, p. 82]. We suspect that Shingo and Deming would have a protracted discussion
about whether workers or management are responsible for defects. No resolution of
that issue is undertaken here.
"To correct this problem, we simply drilled a hole through the electrode that holds the
nut that is attached to the panel in the welding operation. We put a wire through the
hole in the electrode, insulating it away from the electrode so as it passes through it
will only make contact with the weld nut. Since the weld nut is metal, it conducts
electricity and with the nut present, current will flow through, allowing the machine to
complete its cycle. If a nut is not present, there will be no current flow. We try to
control the process so that the machine will actually remain idle unless there is a nut
in place."
JUDGMENT INSPECTION
QC
INFORMATIVE INSPECTION
SOURCE INSPECTION
Judgment inspection involves sorting the defects out of the acceptable product,
sometimes referred to as "inspecting in quality." Shingo agreed with the consensus in
modern quality control that "inspecting in quality" is not an effective quality
management approach, and cautioned against it.
Informative inspection uses data gained from inspection to control the process and
prevent defects. Traditional SPC is a type of informative inspection. Both successive
checks and self-checks in ZQC are also a type of informative inspection. Successive
checks were Shingo's response to the insight that improvements are more rapid when
quality feedback is more rapid [1986, pp. 67-69]. Work-in-process undergoes many
operating steps as it is moved through a manufacturing facility. Often inspections are
conducted at intermediate stages in the process. Shingo's concern was that the
inspections may not occur soon enough after production to give the best information
necessary to determine the cause of the quality problem so that it can be prevented in
the future. By having each operation inspect the work of the prior operation, quality
feedback can be given on a much more timely basis. Successive checks are having the
nearest downstream operation check the work of the prior operation. Each operation
performs both production and quality inspection. Effective poka-yoke devices make
such an inspection system possible by reducing the time and cost of inspection to near
zero. Because inspections entail minimal cost, every item may be inspected. Provided
that work-in-process inventories are low, quality feedback used to improve the
process can be provided very rapidly.
While successive checks provide rapid feedback, having the person who performs the
production operation check their own work provides even faster feedback. Self-
checks use poka-yoke devices to allow workers to assess the quality of their own
work. Because they check every unit produced, operators may be able to recognize
what conditions changed that caused the last unit to be defective. This insight is used
to prevent further defects. Self-checks are preferred to successive checks whenever
possible.
Since the main difference between successive checks and self-checks is which work
station performs the inspection, in this research we do not distinguish between the two
types of informative inspection. Both successive and self-checks provide information
"after the fact."
Source inspection determines "before the fact" whether the conditions necessary for
high quality production exist. (Note that Shingo's use of the term source inspection is
not the practice of having the buyer's representative inspect the quality of work-in-
progress at the supplier's facility, which is also called source inspection.) Shingo
writes, "It had dawned on me that the occurrence of a defect was the result of some
condition or action, and that it would be possible to eliminate defects entirely by
pursuing the cause" [Shingo, 1986, p.50]. He further writes that "I realized that the
idea of checking operating conditions before the operations rather than after them was
precisely the same as my concept of source inspection" [Shingo,1986, p.51].
With source inspection, poka-yoke devices ensure that proper operating conditions
exist prior to actual production. Often these devices are also designed to prevent
production from occurring until the necessary conditions are satisfied. Norman [1988]
refers to this type of device as a "forcing function." The example from GM that
"forces" the nut to be present before welding can occur is an example of source
inspection.
Source inspection, self-checks, and successive checks are inspection techniques used
to understand and manage the production process more effectively. Each involves
inspecting 100 percent of the process output. In this sense, zero quality control is a
misnomer. These inspection techniques are intended to increase the speed with which
quality feedback is received. And although every item is inspected, Shingo was
emphatic that the purpose of the inspection is to improve the process and prevent
defects, and therefore is not intended to sort out defects (although in some cases that
may also be an outcome) [Shingo,1986, p. 57]. Shingo believed that source inspection
is the ideal method of quality control since quality feedback about conditions for
quality production is obtained before the process step is performed. Source inspection
is intended to keep defects from occurring. Self-checks and successive checks provide
feedback about the outcomes of the process. Self-checks and successive checks
should be used when source inspection cannot be done or when the process is not yet
well enough understood to develop source inspection techniques.
In Shingo's seminal book on ZQC [1986], he criticized SPC and suggested that ZQC
should supplant SPC as the pre-eminent tool for defect elimination in quality control.
His main argument against SPC was that it is by nature an intermittent form of
inspection, and therefore allows for some number of defects to occur. He further
argued that SPC is designed to maintain the current level of defects, rather than to
aggressively seek to eliminate them. In addition, Shingo claimed that "...a look at
SQC methods as they are actually applied shows that feedback and corrective action -
the crucial aspects of informative inspections - are too slow to be fully effective."
[Shingo, 1986, p.68]
Given the fact that applications of SPC generally have substantial intervals between
the taking of samples, it seems reasonable to argue that feedback will be faster with
source inspection and informative inspection in ZQC. However, it is not clear that
ZQC should be systematically faster than SPC at insuring corrective actions. Indeed,
according to Shingo [Shingo, 1986, p.71], "Defects will never be reduced if the
workers involved do not modify operating methods when defects occur." The
willingness to take corrective action is a function of the attitude and commitment of
both managers and workers, not an intrinsic attribute of a particular approach to
quality management. Shingo's complaint about the actual implementation of SPC may
also apply to ZQC.
A detailed, academic treatment of the relationship between SPC and ZQC is presented
in working papers by Grout and Downs (1995). The essence of their conclusions is
when used for informative inspection,
ZQC is not as effective as SPC for defects that result from variance in
measurement data
ZQC is a special case of SPC for defects that result from variance in attribute
data.
ZQC's source inspection can be used effectively to eliminate mistakes and in
conjunction with SPC to eliminate the recurrence of special causes.
Therefore, Shigeo Shingo explained that for ZQC, the following three components
have to be followed:
1. Explaining the concept and program to all the supervisors and preparing them
to explain it to their people.
2. Determination of the material required and assuring its preparation.
3. Deciding what method of launching a program will be the best for any
particular operation.
4. Spelling out the functions that will be accomplished.
5. Examining the recognition policy of the industry and determining what type of
recognition should be used in praising improved performance.
6. Setting up the time schedules, and making the participants rehearse.
7. Identifying the error cause program and making plans for its execution.
Now the question come how we can implement poka yoka in our organization.
Educate the team about poka-yoke devices
Find the source of the errors
Brainstorming
How Brainstorming?
Conclusion:
It is true that Poka Yoka devices are simple and inexpensive, and used for 100%
inspection of all the items produced so that zero defects can be achieved, but this
is not applicable for every organization until and unless they able to develop the
organization as a centre of excellence ( Total Culture Change for continual
improvement).