Success, By the Numbers (or why being science-y is a good thing)
How do you know if you know? In other words, how do you know when you have sufficient knowledge to reliably improve or manage a process? More than a century ago, Lord Kelvin suggested a simple touchstone to answer this crucial question:
When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. It may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the state of science.
Lord Kelvin
Advancing what you do towards a state of science—whether you work in design, sales, manufacturing, healthcare, the construction trades, or even doing your laundry—always leads to a more reliable knowledge of cause and effect and to more consistent success. This is the very intent of science. And the converse of this principle is also true: whatever you’re doing, when you operate without numbers and data, you’re left with only hit-and-miss knowledge and with it, a hit-and-miss record of success.
“Easy, tiger,” you may be challenging. “Aren’t you taking this a bit too far? I see how science fits with science-y stuff—like launching the space shuttle, brain surgery, or orthopterology. But with everything?” I’m not suggesting you constantly wear a white lab coat and carry a calculator on your belt. But for important endeavors—like meeting a business’s growth objectives, or for getting a new product right the first time, or for completing a project at work, or for achieving a personal goal—what domain would you rather operate in: a realm of cloudy understanding with an unknown chance of success; or a state where you know cause and effect relationships and leverage them to consistently meet your objectives? For me, I’ll take the science.
Using numbers and data to proactively elevate your thoughts and your work into the realm of science is the essence of Six Sigma. It can be summed up by the notation y = f(x) + ε. In future postings I’ll explore some of the facets and implications of Lord Kelvin’s principle, with topics like:
- Putting improvement power into your communications
- The y = f(x) + ε shorthand for Six Sigma
- The skills for thinking Six Sigma
In the meantime, check the level of your own knowledge. Check the knowledge of your company. Is it meager and unsatisfactory? Or does it include numbers, data, and the beginning of science—and the seeds of improvement?
Tags: data, Lord Kelvin, numbers, science, six sigma
January 13th, 2008 at 1:18 am
I don’t see a lot of use (or understanding) on a practical level of Y=f(x) (stated as “Y is a function of X”). To me this means that people don’t really get the need to understand that the ability to consistently and predictably deliver products or services to your customer is a function of the inputs (X) of the process. Perhaps more worryingly is that the quality (or CTQs) of a product or service (which depends on the ingredients (Xs) you use) are just not known.
I find that when leveraging Y=f(x), you need to look for those few Xs that create most of the variation in your process. It can be difficult to know which Xs are important. However, most process variation can be traced back to:
The 6 M’s
Machine, Method, Materials, Measurement, Man and Mother Nature (Environment) (recommended for manufacturing industry).
Note: a more modern selection of categories used in manufacturing are Equipment, Process, People, Materials, Environment, and Management
The 8 P’s
Price, Promotion, People, Processes, Place / Plant, Policies, Procedures & Product (or Service) (recommended for administration and service industry).
The 4 S’s
Surroundings, Suppliers, Systems, Skills (recommended for service industry).
January 14th, 2008 at 7:12 am
You’re right, Rob. The traditional Six Sigma explanations of y = f(x) have limited practical value: y is the output, x is the input. But in an upcoming post, I’ll explain how I use y = f(x) + ε as a guide for integrating the power of Six Sigma improvement into any endeavor. I’m looking forward to your comments.