Comments on: Success, By the Numbers (or why being science-y is a good thing) http://todayssixsigma.com/2008/success-by-the-numbers-or-why-being-science-y-is-a-good-thing/ Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:54:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: CKGygi http://todayssixsigma.com/2008/success-by-the-numbers-or-why-being-science-y-is-a-good-thing/#comment-10 CKGygi Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:12:00 +0000 http://todayssixsigma.com/2008/success-by-the-numbers-or-why-being-science-y-is-a-good-thing/#comment-10 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. 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.

]]> By: Rob http://todayssixsigma.com/2008/success-by-the-numbers-or-why-being-science-y-is-a-good-thing/#comment-9 Rob Sun, 13 Jan 2008 08:18:47 +0000 http://todayssixsigma.com/2008/success-by-the-numbers-or-why-being-science-y-is-a-good-thing/#comment-9 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). 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).

]]>