01 six sigma concept

© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18

”Operational Excellence in everything we do”

Six SigmaSix Sigma@@

EricssonEricsson


Patrizia RattoPatrizia Ratto Laurea in Scienze dell’Informazione (Pisa)Laurea in Scienze dell’Informazione (Pisa) Lavoro in Marconi/Ericsson dal 1993Lavoro in Marconi/Ericsson dal 1993

Software Engineer (applicazioni militari)Software Engineer (applicazioni militari) Team Leader (Sviluppo NMS per applicazioni militari)Team Leader (Sviluppo NMS per applicazioni militari) Responsabile sviluppo soluzioni di collaudoResponsabile sviluppo soluzioni di collaudo Operational Development ManagerOperational Development Manager

Gestione cambiamento/Corsi interni/Migliormamento ordinabilita’ Gestione cambiamento/Corsi interni/Migliormamento ordinabilita’ prodottiprodotti

66σσ Black Belt Black Belt Nata a Genova il 10/02/1966, sposata, due figli Lorenzo Nata a Genova il 10/02/1966, sposata, due figli Lorenzo

(2003) Davide (2006)(2003) Davide (2006)

[email protected]@ericsson.com


”” What brought us here

will not keep us here


Research show that only 16% of change Research show that only 16% of change programs are successfully deliveredprograms are successfully delivered

Most Transformations Fail … … Usually Due To Poor Ownership Building

Source: Standish Group International

31% Cancelled

Business Case invalid Funding Prioritization

• • •

53% Underperform(late, over budget and/or deliver less than the requirement)

Incomplete requirements Lack of Exec Mgmt support and commitment Poor communicationsLack of consistent follow-throughLack of implementation capacity

• • • • •

16% Successful(delivered on time and on budget)

Clear statement of requirements User involvement Exec. Mgmt. support Proper training

• • • •

41% 40%

33%

23% 23%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Lack of SnrMgmt

Commitment

Lack ofCommunication

Lack ofConsistent

Follow -Through

Lack of a ClearIntegratedImplement.

Lack of ClearRealistic

Objectives

Unclear, unrealistic objectives•


What is Six Sigma?What is Six Sigma?

1.1. A strategy for: A strategy for: For cutting costs, increasing quality, shortening lead-For cutting costs, increasing quality, shortening lead-

times, boosting efficiency etc in a very rapid manner. times, boosting efficiency etc in a very rapid manner.

2.2. A methodology and a tool-box.A methodology and a tool-box. Well proven quality tools packed in effective project Well proven quality tools packed in effective project

models.models. A common vocabulary and language.A common vocabulary and language.

3.3. A mindset and cultural changeA mindset and cultural change.. Reveals non-value add costs to operational leaders Reveals non-value add costs to operational leaders

and brings “a sense of urgency” culture to the and brings “a sense of urgency” culture to the organization.organization.

A non-firefighting approach that is focusing on A non-firefighting approach that is focusing on critical business areas.critical business areas.


The history of Six SigmaThe history of Six Sigma

‘‘7474 MATSUSHITA takes over loss-making Quasar MATSUSHITA takes over loss-making Quasar (Television (Television manufacturer) from Motorola (150-180 defects per manufacturer) from Motorola (150-180 defects per 100 TV’s)100 TV’s)

‘‘7979 Defects reduced to 3 per 100 TV’sDefects reduced to 3 per 100 TV’s

‘‘8080 Quasar reports success to ASQC (Hitzelberger Report)Quasar reports success to ASQC (Hitzelberger Report)

‘‘8484 Bill Smith visits Quasar & recommends to Galvin (CEO) Bill Smith visits Quasar & recommends to Galvin (CEO) the Six the Six Sigma Sigma processprocess

‘‘8888 Motorola wins 1st Malcolm Baldridge AwardMotorola wins 1st Malcolm Baldridge Award

‘‘89 89 Onwards Six Sigma adopted by other companies Onwards Six Sigma adopted by other companies Allied Signal, Allied Signal, GE, Rank Xerox, Kodak, ABB, Siebe,…GE, Rank Xerox, Kodak, ABB, Siebe,…


Why Six-Sigma ?Why Six-Sigma ?

99.9997% Good (6

• Seven articles lost per hour

• Unsafe drinking water one minute every seven months

• 1.7 incorrect surgical operations/week

• One short or long landing every five years

• 68 wrong drug prescriptions/year

• One hour without electricity every 34 years

99% Good (3,8

• 20,000 lost articles of mail per hour

• Unsafe drinking water for almost 15 minutes

each day

• 5,000 incorrect surgical operations/week

• Two short or long landings at most major airports each day

• 200,000 wrong drug prescriptions/year

• No electricity for almost 7 hours/month

Peter HäyhänenPeter Häyhänen© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18

Six Sigma Trained People at Six Sigma Trained People at EricssonEricsson

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Tra

ined

Six

Sig

ma

emp

loye

es

e-Belts

Green Belts

Yellow Belts

Managers

Black Belts

Black Belts:Black Belts: Change agents trained 20 days in change mgmt, statistical tools and qualitative methods. Requirement: 1MSEK saving

Manager Training:Manager Training:A two to three day training in coaching/managing improvements and efficient sponsorship

Yellow Belt:Yellow Belt:: A threethree to fivefive day DMAIC and simple Six Sigma tools training for people who apply Six Sigma in daily operations.

Green Belt:Green Belt:: A sixsix to ninenine day DMAIC or IDDOV selected tools training for people who apply Six Sigma in daily operations and drives smaller project.


Six Sigma at Ericsson– Six Sigma at Ericsson– organic organic growthgrowth

1996-97Problemsolving

Assembly

Black BeltMngrs training

~750 Ksek/proj~10 proj

1998-99ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.

AssemblyTest + Sourcing

Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow Belt

~1,2 MSEK/proj~100 proj

2000-01ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.

AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogistics

Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite Belt

~1,2 MSEK/proj~250 proj

2002-03ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.Product develop.

AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SW

Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite Belt

~10 MSEK/proj~350 proj

2004-05ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.HR, Forcasting

AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SWSupport

Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite BeltGreen Belt


R

esul

ts

T

rain

ings

P

roce

ss

P

urpo

se

2006-07ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.HR, ForecastingMU Efficiency & C.S

AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SWSupportServices

Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite BeltGreen Belt



Six Sigma Deployment Six Sigma Deployment StructureStructure

Champions: Champions: A Business aligned two day add-on training to the line managers training. Gives you deployment strategies, Six Sigma to business alignment and Six Sigma program support.

YellowYellow- / Green Belts:Green Belts: A threethree or sixsix day DMAIC and simple Six Sigma tools training is for people who wants to apply Six Sigma in daily operations and drive tasks in Black Belt projects.

Black BeltsBlack Belts:: 1-2 % of the staff is trained in 20 days in defining and driving business goals aligned projects selected and sponsored by the top management.

Master Black BeltsMaster Black Belts:: Is a Black Belt trainer, project- and management team (MT) coach. Runs typically cross functional projects, is a methodology coach for ~10 Black Belts, helps M.T. to align the Six Sigma initiatives with the business strategy.

Six Sigma Line Mgrs:Six Sigma Line Mgrs:A two day training in tools and project models to coach and drive Six Sigma work in projects and processes. You learn what to expect from your Black-, Yellow and White belts is you do your share of the work.

White Belts:White Belts: Is an universal training for blue collar workers and everybody who only wants an introduction. In one day you get an understanding of COPQ and Variation.


New Tools Same New Tools Same Behaviours?Behaviours?


Six Sigma is a systematic, Six Sigma is a systematic, pragmatic and focused approach pragmatic and focused approach

to fulfill business objectives to fulfill business objectives

Identify

Define

Design

Optimize

Validate

Design objectives

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

Improvement objectives

applied in thoroughly defined project assignments

Not an vague philosophy and religion that many un-Not an vague philosophy and religion that many un-trained people tends to think. trained people tends to think. A statistical toolbox A statistical toolbox used to focus on variation, probability for defects used to focus on variation, probability for defects

and cost of failuresand cost of failures

QFDDoE

ANOVA

SPS

T-testYield

FMEA7MT

BenchmarkPDSA

CapabilityRegressionTaguchi

7QCT

Well proven tools & techniques

An customer focusedOutside Inthinking

Ericsson’s view of corporate contribution

Customer view ofEricsson contribution

Exposure of Cost Of Poor Quality and Non Value-Add operations

Non-value addOperations &

Costs

Value addValue add


Why is this change needed?Why is this change needed?

Understand where do we stand today?Understand where do we stand today?

What is the financial value of this change?What is the financial value of this change?

Which performance results has to be achieved?Which performance results has to be achieved?

From whom do we need strong commitment?From whom do we need strong commitment?

What can go wrong and hinder success? What can go wrong and hinder success?

How is the change program going to be undertaken? How is the change program going to be undertaken?

How can the project easily be summarized?How can the project easily be summarized?

A proper definition of the program is critical A proper definition of the program is critical for successful performancefor successful performance

Problem statement

Goalstatement

Businesscase

Stakeholdermgmt

Riskanalysis

Baselineanalysis

Projectcharter

Projectplan

”A problem well stated is a problem half solved”

Activities from DMAIC - Define

What is Quality?What is Quality?


Why measure?Why measure?

We don't knowWe don't know what we don't know ... what we don't know ...

If we can’t put number to it If we can’t put number to it

we really do not know much about it…we really do not know much about it…

If we don't know much about itIf we don't know much about it

we can not act ...we can not act ...

If we can not act,If we can not act,

we are at the mercy of chance ...we are at the mercy of chance ...

Dr Mikel J Harry

”Six Sigma founder Motorola”


“Good quality does not necessarily mean high quality. It means a predictable degree of uniformity and dependability at low cost with a quality suited to the market.”

Dr. W. Edwards Deming


Why do we need to work Why do we need to work with quality?with quality?

Customer satisfactionCustomer satisfaction Market shareMarket share RevenueRevenue

Operational Efficiency Operational Efficiency Cost reductionCost reduction

Higher profitabilityHigher profitability Less claimsLess claims Less reworkLess rework Less materialLess material

Higher ITO (Inventory Turn Over)Higher ITO (Inventory Turn Over)


Successful Successful DeploymentDeployment

MethodologyMethodology

Change Change ManagementManagement

ResultsResults

Six Sigma is a systematic Six Sigma is a systematic way to Operational way to Operational

Excellence Excellence


I have no time for any salesman. I’m going to war!


The hidden change barriers -Formal authority-

-Logic- -Procedures-

-Organization charts- -Budget-

-Time schedule- -Tools/Methods-

-Fear- -Trust- -Informal authority-

-Self esteem- -Previous experiences-

-Private life- -Social networks-

-Hierarchy- -Personal perspective-

-Personal & Organizational self confidence-

-Insecurity- -Culture and atmosphere-

-Unclear communication- -Conservatism-

-Status- -Disbelief- -Prestige-

-Rumors- -Unspoken consequences-

Change leaders


5% 20%

50%

20% 5%

“Change Leaders”Terrorists & Resistors

I’ll go!May I, Can I?

I’ll wait and seeIf I

absolutely must

I will never!

Change Management distribution





ResultsResults




ImprovementsImprovementsDMAICDMAIC

Six SigmaSix Sigma

DesignDesignIDDOVIDDOV

IntegratedIntegratedTool by toolTool by tool

Existing Existing Business Business

GoalsGoals

Black BeltsBlack BeltsLine ManagersLine Managers

ChampionsChampionsYellow BeltsYellow Belts

QFDDoE

ANOVA

SPS

T-testYield

FMEA7MT

BenchmarkPDSA

CapabilityRegressionTaguchi

7QCT

Well proven tools & techniques

• CoachingCoaching• External Benchmark External Benchmark • Best practice data baseBest practice data base





ResultsResults




Project models within Project models within EricssonEricsson

Other ”Just do it” Projects/Programs

P R O P S

D M A I C

Improvements

New designs - DFSS

I D

D

O V

E A

F C

G

B HDL

KJ IM


Define “Critical To Quality” Define “Critical To Quality” characteristicscharacteristicsFlow-down Customer, Stakeholder, Governmental and History critical to Satisfaction Y´s down to tangible CTQ’s and design X’s

Design Product & Process conceptDesign Product & Process conceptBuild concepts and judge them to CTQ’s and X’s. Simulate and explore product robustness to manufacturing and usage variation.Simulate and explore process robustness to product and manufacturing variation.

Design For Six SigmaDesign For Six Sigma (IDDOV – the concept)

Optimize Product Optimize Product & Process design& Process design

Run experiments, analyze data and set design and process parameters to optimize for robustness.

CustomersUnderstand and quantify Customers needs andrequirements

StakeholdersUse Corporate Business Goals and flow down to Design financial goals and Business Case

HistoryEvaluate historical external & internal data to find CTQs

Validate Product & ProcessValidate Product & ProcessValidate product (and process) performance to CTQ’s and customer and stakeholder requirements.Set up appropriate product and process control mechanisms to establish long term quality assurance IIdentifydentify

DDefineefine

DDesignesign

VValidatealidate

OOptimizeptimizeTG2

TG1

TG3

TG4

TG5


Find “Critical To Quality” Find “Critical To Quality” characteristicscharacteristicsQFDCTQ-treeCause& Effect matrixTaguchi Loss functionsBusiness caseCTQ-scorecardBenchmarkingPCM (yield matrix)Capability analysis

Build a Product & Process conceptBuild a Product & Process conceptPugh Concept Selection MatrixProcess mappingTaguchi Loss functionsSimulations (Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc)FMEA (Product, Process, Supply-chain)Robust engineering PCM (yield matrix)

IIdentifydentify

DDefineefine

DDesignesign

VValidatealidate

OOptimizeptimizeTG2

TG1

TG3

TG4

TG5

Design For Six SigmaDesign For Six Sigma (IDDOV – the tools)

Optimize Product Optimize Product & Process design& Process design

DOEGauge R&RPoke-YokeCapability analysisAnova

Robust engineeringRegression analysisFault treesPCM (yield matrix)DMAIC

CustomersSurveys, VOC Taguchi Loss functions Kano-model

StakeholdersStakeholder map,Business CaseCTQ-tree

History7QCT, Capability analysisRegression analysis

Validate Product & ProcessValidate Product & ProcessDOEGauge R&RSPCPoke-YokeCapability analysis

AnovaP-diagramRegression analysisFault treesDMAICPCM (yield matrix)

CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//

Y tol//

Z dpmo

etc..

CTQ-scorecard


IIDDOVDDOV

We understand what has to be done We understand what has to be done from a product, process and financial standpoint.from a product, process and financial standpoint.

IdentifyIdentify

Kano-modelBusiness CaseLoss Functions

What should we offer and is it a

economical beneficial deal for

us?

Voice of the BusinessVoice of the Business

Surveys, focus groups,

interviews

What is the market (n * customer) need

behind the requirements?

Voice of the CustomerVoice of the Customer

satisfied

omitted included

delightM

ore is

bett

er

Must be

dissatisfied

Offerings

Customer Satisfaction

Less Less correctcorrect

LessLesscorrectcorrect

0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9

Process Variation Quality Loss Function

MoreMoreCorrectCorrect

Process Capability

What is our What is our previous design previous design

track record?track record?

Voice of the ProcessVoice of the Process

Process map

Equip.Mgmt.

Order/ Leasing

Pick-Up & Delivery

Customer Service

Billing

Customercalls for

repair

CSRqualifies

customersneed

CSREnters case

in CIS

Branchshedules

repair

Servicerfixes

problem

CSRverifies

customersatisfaction

CSRcompletes

case


IIDDDOVDOV

Key specific goals critical to Key specific goals critical to achieve in the design work (CTQ). achieve in the design work (CTQ).

How, when and who must we assure How, when and who must we assure CTQs trough the design activities?CTQs trough the design activities?

Voice of the Voice of the CustomerCustomer Voice of Voice of

the the BusinessBusiness

Voice of the Voice of the ProcessProcess

BenchmarkCause & Effect diagram, 7MT

Loss functions, Stakeholder map,

CTQ tree, QFD, Q systemization

DefineShorter lead-timesShorter lead-times

InstallationInstallation

DeliveryDelivery

QuotationsQuotations

No errors (did understand custiomer needs)Responsivness

Meets customer needs

No updates

To site delivery

Short assambly time

Test trail done same day as site installation

Accessible sales staff

Equip.Mgmt.

Order/ Leasing

Pick-Up & Delivery

Customer Service

Billing

Customercalls for

repair

CSRqualifies

customersneed

CSREnters case

in CIS

Branchshedules

repair

Servicerfixes

problem

CSRverifies

customersatisfaction

CSRcompletes

case

B: Yield=?defects X2

C: Yield=? defects X1,5

A: Yield=?defects X1

D: Yield=? defects X1

Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=?

S&D=1,5

Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=?F6=50 dpmoF7=150 dpmo

S&D=0,9

Functions

Y1…Y10=?

S&D=1,5

Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=99.993F6= 25 dpmoF7=15 dpmoF8=90 dpmo

S&D=1,6

Ytot = 85% Target Yield

Step-1Customer Requirements

Step-2Regulatory Requirements

Step-3Customer Importance Ratings

Step-4Customer

Rating of the Competition

Step-5 Technical Descriptors -"Voice of the Engineer"

Step-6 Direction of Improvement

Step-7 Relationship Matrix

Step - 8 Technical Analysis of Competitor Products

Step - 9 Target Values for Technical Descriptors

Step-10 Correlation

Matrix

Step-11 Absolute Importance


IDIDDDOVOV

Pugh

Concept

Selection Matrix

Taguchi Loss functions

Montecarlo & statistical simulations

(functions, Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc)


Y tol//

Z dpmo

etc..

CTQ-scorecard

DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard

Design

Q systemization

Statistical tolerancing23

22

21

2Total

Sum of all parts...Part

/system 1

Part/

system 3

Part/

system 2

P-diagramsOut-put parameter (Y’s)

Input parameters (x’s)

Engineering (design) parameters

Noise parameters

System

SMD RF-TXRF-RXSUBET - 1ET - 2ET - 3SYSTSYST E1SYS E2Final ETotal

MaterialProcess.ReworkScrapTotal Yield (fp)TK (sek)10700 2360 1523 79315376 25%

Production tariff (sek) 3000 4200 4200 3000 750 750 750 750 750 750 750Reparation tariff (sek) 525 525 525 525 500 500 500 500 500 500 500Material cost (sek) 3500 3000 3000 200 1000 10700Repair material cost 400 400Processtime (min) 4,0 6,0 6,0 2,5 4,6 6,0 9,0 7,0 24,0 10,0 35,0

1:st reparationtime (min) 0,0 20,0 20,0 5,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 0,0 60,0 120,0 60,02:nd reparationtime (min) 20,0 20,0 5,0 45,0 60,0 60,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,03:rd reparationtime (min) 20,0 20,0 5,0 90,0 90,0 90,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,04:th reparationtime (min) 0,0 0,0 0,0 90,0 90,0 90,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,0Processtime after rep. 0,0 6,0 6,0 5,0 4,6 6,0 9,0 7,0 24,0 10,0 35,0Yield 1:st pass (%) 75% 80% 89% 90% 98% 95% 90% 85% 95% 85% 90%Yield 2:nd pass (%) 100% 90% 95% 95% 99% 98% 95% 100% 98% 93% 95%Yield 3:rd pass (%) 100% 95% 97% 98%100% 99% 98% 100% 99% 96% 98%Yield 4:th pass (%) 100% 98% 99%100%100%100% 99% 100% 100% 99%100%

Scrap % 1,00%2,00%2,00%0,75%0,01%0,01%1,00%0,00%0,01%1,00%0,01%Rejections from later steps (%)3,00%15,00%15,00%1,00%0,00%0,00%10,00%0,00%0,00%0,00%0,00%Processing cost (sek) 1:st200,0 420,0 420,0125,0 57,5 75,0112,5 87,5 300,0125,0437,5 2360Reparation cost (sek) 0,0 87,5 59,9 8,1 8,8 38,5136,5 0,0 45,2240,9 88,6 714Scrapp cost (sek) 37,0 76,8 74,9 90,3 1,2 1,2 126,4 0,0 1,3 146,2 1,5 557

Proc. cost after repair (sek) 0,0 334,1 263,3 43,8 1,7 6,6 21,1 0,0 27,1 33,9 77,6 809Material cost repair (sek) 135,0 101,3 0,0 236

Total cost 3737 4053 39191217712246123671276412851,4142251477115376

Extra processtime (min) 0,00 3,15 2,14 0,93 0,14 0,53 2,59 1,05 2,17 2,71 6,20Capacity loss due to repair 0% 34% 26% 27% 3% 8% 22% 13% 8% 21% 15%

11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65

Upper SpecLower Spec

sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83

Capability analysis

11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65



Capability analysis

11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65



Capability analysis

11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65


sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTarg

CpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.9525

5360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83

Capability analysis

11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65


sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.00

1.912.502.503.172.83

Capability analysis

DOEFMEA (Design, Process, Supply-chain)

PotentialFailure Effects

SEV

Potential Causes OCC

Current Controls DET

RPN

Actions

Recommended Resp.

Operator skill/training

Motor frame is unstable

3 1 6 1

8Operator knowledge Ticket specifies - but coded

Coding chart to be issued & displayed by machine

DarrenWooler

Parameter/ Concept

Impo

rtan

ce 1. Functionalorganisation(description)

2. Projectorganisation(description)

3. Matrix-organisation offunctions and topfive customers(description)

4. Product-generationorganisation(description)

Knowledge development 1 S W S W

Flexibility 1 S B S S

Customer focus 1 S B B S

Cost control 2 SS BB SS WW

Co-operation 1 S B B S

Simplicity for newemployees.

1 S W S B

Long term continuity 1 S W W W

Sum 0 W 3 W / 5 B 1 W / 2 B 4 W / 1 B

1

2 4

3

Transfer functions

Less Less correctcorrect

LessLesscorrectcorrect

0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7

Process VariationQuality Loss Function

MoreMoreCorrectCorrect


IDDIDDOOVV

Gauge R&R

DOE

Anova

FMEA

Poke-Yoke

Hypothesis testing

Power & Sample Size


Y tol//

Z dpmo

etc..

CTQ-scorecard DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard

Capability analysis

Optimize

Error type

Harm

Error type

Harm

Adapted from James Reason’s Managing the Risk of Organizational Accidents

Gage name:Date of s tudy :Reported by :

Tolerance:Misc :

043.9

44.0

44.1

44.2Joe M ar y Pat

Xbar Chart by Name

Sa

mp

le M

ea

n

Mean=44.11UCL=44.14

LCL=44.09

0

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04Joe M ar y Pat

R Chart by Name

Sa

mp

le R

an

ge

R=0.01280

UCL=0.04182

LCL=0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

44.0

44.1

44.2

Part ID

NameName*Part ID Interaction

Av

era

ge

J oe Mary Pat

Joe Mary Pat

43.95

44.05

44.15

44.25

Name

By Name

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

43.95

44.05

44.15

44.25

Part ID

By Part ID

%Contribution %Study Var %Tolerance

Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part

0

50

100

Components of Variation

Pe

rce

nt

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Measure

555045403530

USLLSL

Process Capability Analysis

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

Ppk

PPL

PPU

Pp

Cpm

Cpk

CPL

CPU

Cp

StDev (Overall)

StDev (Within)

Sample N

Mean

LSL

Target

USL

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

12500,00

0,00

12500,00

2,30

2,34

2,30

2,32

*

3,20

3,26

3,20

3,23

1,79818

1,29107

80

44,6165

32,0000

*

57,0000

Exp. "Overall" PerformanceExp. "Within" PerformanceObserved PerformanceOverall Capability

Potential (Within) Capability

Process Data

Within

Overall

TruthTruth

DecisionDecision

Type IErrorrisk

Type IIErrorrisk

CorrectDecision

CorrectDecision

Ho

Ho Ha

Ha

SEV * OCC * DET = RPN

(3 *1*6 = 18)

SEV * OCC * DET = RPN

(3 *1*6 = 18)

PotentialFailure Effects

SEV

Potential Causes OCC

Current Controls DET

RPN

Actions

Recommended Resp.

Operator skill/training

Motor frame is unstable

3 1 6 1

8

Recommended actions and person responsible for implementation.

Operator knowledge Ticket specifies - but coded

Coding chart to be issued & displayed by machine

DarrenWooler

Risk Priority Number

(RPN)


IDDOIDDOVV CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//

Y tol//

Z dpmo

etc..

CTQ-scorecard

DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard

Validate

Power & Sample size

Gauge R&R

Design Of Experiments

Capability analysis

Statistical Process Control

2004

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51

EWMA

+3S

+2S

+1S

Linest

Profile

-1S

-2S

-3S

>3S

9pt

+/- 6Pt

14Pt alter

2(3) +/-2S

4(5) +/-1S

15Pt In S

8Pt +/- 1S

200220032004År 0,10

0,200,25

95000100000105000

Välj antal

Gage nam e:Date of s tudy :Reported by :

To leranc e:M is c :

043 .9

44.0

44.1

44.2Joe M ar y Pat

Xbar Chart by Name

Sa

mp

le M

ea

n

M ean=44.11UCL=44.14

LCL=44.09

0

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04Joe M ar y Pat

R Chart by Name

Sa

mp

le R

an

ge

R=0.01280

UCL=0.04182

LCL=0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

44.0

44.1

44.2

Part ID

Nam eName*Part ID Interaction

Av

era

ge

J oe M ary Pat

J oe M ary Pat

43 .95

44.05

44.15

44.25

Nam e

By Name

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

43.95

44.05

44.15

44.25

Part ID

By Part ID

%Contribution %Study Var %Toleranc e

Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part

0

50

100

Components of Variation

Pe

rce

nt

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Measure

555045403530

USLLSL

Process Capability Analysis

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

PPM Total

PPM > USL

PPM < LSL

Ppk

PPL

PPU

Pp

Cpm

Cpk

CPL

CPU

Cp

StDev (Overall)

StDev (Within)

Sample N

Mean

LSL

Target

USL

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

0,00

12500,00

0,00

12500,00

2,30

2,34

2,30

2,32

*

3,20

3,26

3,20

3,23

1,79818

1,29107

80

44,6165

32,0000

*

57,0000

Exp. "Overall" PerformanceExp. "Within" PerformanceObserved PerformanceOverall Capability


Process Data

Within

Overall


IdentifyIdentify Customers, Stakeholders & History.

•Surveys, VOC•Taguchi Loss functions•Kano-model•Stakeholder map•Business case•7QCT•Capability analysis•Regression analysis

• Team training &

coaching

DefineFind “Critical To Quality” characteristics.

•QFD•CTQ-tree•Cause & Effect matrix•Taguchi Loss functions•Business case•CTQ scorecard•Benchmarking•PCM (yield matrix)•Capability analysis

•Team training & coaching

DesignBuild a product & Process concept.

•Pugh Concept Selection Matrix•Process Mapping•Taguchi Loss Functions•Simulations (Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc.)•FMEA (Product, Process, Supply-chain)•Fishbone diagram•PCM (yield matrix)

• Team training & coaching

OptimizeOptimize Product & Process design.

•DOE•Gauge R&R•Poka-Yoke•Capability analysis•Anova•P-diagram•Regression analysis•Fault trees•PCM (yield matrix)•DMAIC

•Team training & coaching

ValidateValidate Product & Process.

•DOE•Gauge R&R•SPC•Poka-Yoke•Capability analysis•Anova•P-diagram•Regression analysis•Fault trees•DMAIC•PCM (yield matrix)

• Team training & coaching

IDDOV ChartIDDOV Chart


Merging Behavior Change and Merging Behavior Change and Operational Change into one Operational Change into one

Improvement ProcessImprovement Process

Project Monitoring and Support Process

Project Execution Phase

Realization Hand-overEstablishment

Steering Decision Process

ProjectConclusion

Phase

ProjectAnalysis Phase

ProjectPlanning

Phase

TG0 TG1 TG2 TG3 TG4 TG5

MS3

MS4

MS6

MS5

MS1.1

MS1

MS2

MS1.2

Improvement Process

Defin

e

Imp

rov

e

Co

ntro

l

Me

as

ure

An

aly

ze

D M A I C

Low High

C Keep Satisfied

A Minimal effort B Keep informed

D Key players

Low

Hig

h

Individual A

Individual B

Individual C

Individual D

Area manager B

Individual F

Individual E

All line-operators

High Probability

High Impact

Low Probability

High Impact

High Probability

Low Impact

Low Probability

Low Impact

E

A

FCGB

HD

Improve

TG2 Decision

Timeplan (Improve-Control)

Update project definition /incl final goals)

Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review

Analyze of data

Analyze

Cause& Effect relations (7MT)

Benchmark others

Measurement system analysis

Start to measure

Data collection plan

Process map "As Is"

Measure

TG1 Decision Milestone plan

Risk analysis

Communication plan

Stakeholder analysis Process map

TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2

Business Case Goal statement

Customer, Sponsor and project team

Baseline estimation

Problem stated

Define 13121110987654

19.518.016.515.013.512.010.5

LSL USL

LSL 10

Target *USL 20

Sample Mean 17.2456Sample N 57

StDev(Within) 1.09233

StDev(Overall) 1.44831

Process Data

Cp 1.53

CPL 2.21CPU 0.84

Cpk 0.84

Pp 1.15

PPL 1.67

PPU 0.63Ppk 0.63

Cpm *

Overall Capability


PPM < LSL 0.00

PPM > USL 52631.58PPM Total 52631.58

Observed Performance

PPM < LSL 0.00

PPM > USL 5841.45PPM Total 5841.45

Exp. Within Performance

PPM < LSL 0.28

PPM > USL 28598.99PPM Total 28599.27

Exp. Overall Performance

WithinOverall

Process Capability of Buffer level (last 2 months)

Delivery perfomance

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

90,0%

100,0%

2004

w45

2004

w46

2004

w47

2004

w48

2004

w49

2004

w50

2004

w51

2004

w52

2004

w53

2005

w01

2005

w02

2005

w03

2005

w04

2005

w05

2005

w06

2005

w07

2005

w08

2005

w09

2005

w10

2005

w11

2005

w12

2005

w13

SMART

Leadingchange

Leadingchange

Creating ashared need

Creating ashared need

Shapinga vision

Shapinga vision

Mobilizingcommittment

MobilizingcommittmentModifying systems

and structures

Modifying systemsand structures

Monitoringprogress

Monitoringprogress

Making it last

Making it last

SuccessfulChange Process

SuccessfulChange Process

Improvement name:

Improvement Driver

Sponsor:

Reference number: Sta

rt day

:Define review :Measure ‘’

: Analyze ‘’

: Improve ‘’

:Control ‘’

:Closure day

:

Team members: (Name / function / %-time)

Biggest risks:

Problem statement:

Goal statement:

Business case:

Improvement Scope:

Sponsor: (Sign/date)

Improvement leader: (Sign/date)

Line manager: (Sign/date)

Mentor/coach: (Sign/date)


Understand need of change

DMAIC DMAIC – Ericsson Improvement – Ericsson Improvement

processprocess Understand

realityIdentify

root-causesMake it happen Make it stick

DEFINE MEASURE ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL

•Why do we need to change?•What’s the goal?•Who needs to be involved?

•What’s the current way of working?•How do we measure this?

•What are the root-causes?•How do they influence the goal fulfillment?

•Will you fulfill the goal with selected solution?•How do you implement this with people commitment? •How do you track progress?

•Has the goal been fulfilled?•How to secure that the implementation will stick?

Delivery perfomance

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

90,0%

100,0%

2004w

45

2004w

46

2004w

47

2004w

48

2004w

49

2004w

50

2004w

51

2004w

52

2004w

53

2005w

01

2005w

02

2005w

03

2005w

04

2005w

05

2005w

06

2005w

07

2005w

08

2005w

09

2005w

10

2005w

11

2005w

12

2005w

13

Company B

0 . 0

10 0 . 0

2 0 0 . 0

3 0 0 . 0

4 0 0 . 0

5 0 0 . 0

6 0 0 . 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7

0

10

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0

TOT TOT raw mtrl TOT TOT Work in progress TOT TOT Finished goods

8 w eek inv days Inv days

HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TRX

RA

X

ETM

4

CU

ETM

C

ETM

1

RFI

F

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TRX

RA

X

ETM

4

CU

ETM

C

ETM

1

RFI

F

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k

Improve TG2 Decision

Timeplan (Improve-Control)


Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review Analyze of data Analyze

Cause& Effect relations (7MT) Benchmark others

Measurement system analysis Start to measure

Data collection plan Process map "As Is"Measure TG1 Decision Milestone plan Risk analysis Communication plan Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision

Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case Goal statement

Customer, Sponsor and project team Baseline estimation Problem statedDefine 13121110987654week

W0509W0452W0442W0430W 0420W 0410Week

11

Mean=1,652UCL=4,220

LCL=-0,9170

1 2 3

15

10

5

0

Mov

ing R

ange

1

R=0,9658

UCL=3,156

LCL=0

1 2 3

Delivery Precision Supplier 2004-2005w17

After phase completion you will have clear answers on the following questions:

”Do the right things the right way”


”A problem well stated is a problem half solved”

Create shared need Define wanted position Mobilize commitment

Identify sponsor & change leader

State problem/opportunity Calculate business case Evaluate change readiness

Define Goal statement Perform risk analysis Benchmark similar

improvement initiatives

Perform stakeholder analysis Define communication/

involvement plan Involve key stakeholders to

make change happen Complete improvement charter

Why do we need to change?

What’s the goal? Who needs to be involved?

Delivery perfomance

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

90,0%

100,0%

20

04

w4

5

20

04

w4

6

20

04

w4

7

20

04

w4

8

20

04

w4

9

20

04

w5

0

20

04

w5

1

20

04

w5

2

20

04

w5

3

20

05

w0

1

20

05

w0

2

20

05

w0

3

20

05

w0

4

20

05

w0

5

20

05

w0

6

20

05

w0

7

20

05

w0

8

20

05

w0

9

20

05

w1

0

20

05

w11

20

05

w1

2

20

05

w1

3

High Probability

High Impact

Low Probability

High Impact

High Probability

Low Impact

Low Probability

Low Impact

E

A

FCG B

HD

DEFINEUnderstand

need of change

MEASUREUnderstand

reality

ANALYZEIdentify

root-causes

IMPROVEMake it happen

CONTROLMake it

stick

DEFINE DEFINE Understand need of changeUnderstand need of change


Define Phase - Key StepsDefine Phase - Key StepsDefineDefine the task and its financial impact

MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod

AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes

ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions

ControlEnsure thatthe results will last

Stakeholder map

Fo

rmal

or

info

rmal

au

tho

rity

Level of true Individual InterestLow High

C Keep Satisfied

A Minimal effort B Keep informed

D Key players

Low

Hig

h

Individual A

Individual B

Individual C

Individual D

Area manager B

Individual F

Individual E

All line-operators

Area manager B

S i x S i g m a D M A I C p r o j e c t c h a r t e r

P r o j e c t n a m e : L e a d - t i m e r e d u c t i o n o n t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s

P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a

S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n

P r o j e c t n u m b e r :

S t a r t d a y : D e f i n e r e v i e w : M e a s u r e ‘ ’ : A n a l y z e ‘ ’ : I m p r o v e ‘ ’ : C o n t r o l ‘ ’ : C l o s u r e d a y :

2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1

P r o j e c t m e m b e r s : ( N a m e / f u n c t i o n / % - t i m e ) J o r g e A d u n a / P r o j e c t L e a d e r / 5 0 %

K e y w o r d s :

P r o b l e m / o p p o r t u n i t y s t a t e m e n t : L e a d - t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e d e c r e a s i n g d u e t o m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n . L o w y i e l d d u r i n g i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n a n d b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s o b s e r v e d . M a n y o f t h e y i e l d p r o b l e m s c a n b e r e l a t e d t o i n c o m p l e t e t e s t d e s i g n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t l e a d - t i m e s s h o u l d d e c r e a s e t o m e e t t h e n e w r e q u i r e m e n t s . G o a l s t a t e m e n t :

7 0 % Y i e l d o n L N A t e s t f o r t h e F U 1 7 0 0 a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n , 1 0 % i n c r e a s e i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h F U 1 9 0 0 ( 6 0 % ) . A s a r e s u l t o f a f i n a l i z e d t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a u t o m a t i c t e s t f i x t u r e s ) .

F U 1 7 0 0 v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o s t a r t Q 2 2 0 0 6 B u s i n e s s c a s e : B a s e d o n a p r o d u c t i o n v o l u m e o f 3 6 0 0 L N A u n i t s p e r m o n t h :

A 1 0 % 1 s t p a s s y i e l d i n c r e a s e i n t h e L N A t e s t m e a n s 1 2 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o l e s s r e - t e s t i n g . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e a u t o m a t i c L N A t e s t f i x t u r e m e a n s 8 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o s h o r t e r p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .

P r o j e c t c o s t s : 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K S a v i n g s i n 3 m o n t h s p r o d u c t i o n : 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K = 5 0 0 0 0 0 S E K P r o j e c t S c o p e : L N A t e s t f o r F U 1 7 0 0 . O t h e r F U t e s t s ( T u n e , V S W R , F i n a l ) n o t i n c l u d e d . S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )

P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a ( S i g n / d a t e )

L i n e m a n a g e r : C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )

B B - m e n t o r / c o a c h : C h r i s t i a n L e n n e b l a d ( S i g n / d a t e )







2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1


K e y w o r d s :







L i n e m a n a g e r : C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )


Project charterRisk analysisHigh Probability

High Impact

Low Probability

High Impact

High Probability

Low Impact

Low Probability

Low Impact

E

A

FCG B

HD

Savings Costs

Business case

Goal statement

Time & resource plan

Improve TG2 Decision Timeplan (Improve-Control)


Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review Analyze of data

Analyze Cause& Effect relations (7MT) Benchmark others Measurement system analysis Start to measure

Data collection plan Process map "As Is"

Measure TG1 Decision

Milestone plan Risk analysis Communication plan

Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case

Goal statement


Baseline estimation Problem stated

Define 13121110987654week

Analysisof current base line

19.518.016.515.013.512.010.5

LSL USL

LSL 10Target *USL 20Sample Mean 17.2456Sample N 57StDev(Within) 1.09233StDev(Overall) 1.44831

Process Data

Cp 1.53CPL 2.21CPU 0.84Cpk 0.84

Pp 1.15PPL 1.67PPU 0.63Ppk 0.63Cpm *

Overall Capability


PPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 52631.58PPM Total 52631.58

Observed PerformancePPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 5841.45PPM Total 5841.45

Exp. Within PerformancePPM < LSL 0.28PPM > USL 28598.99PPM Total 28599.27

Exp. Overall Performance

WithinOverall

Process Capability of Buffer level (last 2 months)

Change need

Delivery perfomance

0,0%

10,0%

20,0%

30,0%

40,0%

50,0%

60,0%

70,0%

80,0%

90,0%

100,0%

2004

w45

2004

w46

2004

w47

2004

w48

2004

w49

2004

w50

2004

w51

2004

w52

2004

w53

2005

w01

2005

w02

2005

w03

2005

w04

2005

w05

2005

w06

2005

w07

2005

w08

2005

w09

2005

w10

2005

w11

2005

w12

2005

w13

VoC-tree, Process maps, Sampling, Capability analysis, SMART, Business Case, Stakeholder map, Mini-risk brainstorm/FMEAVoC-tree, Process maps, Sampling, Capability analysis, SMART, Business Case, Stakeholder map, Mini-risk brainstorm/FMEATools:Tools:

SMART


Understand “AS-IS” process Measure “AS-IS” process

Build “AS-IS” process map Understand barriers to change Setup potential cause & effect relations Benchmark

Plan and perform data collection Validate measurements Measure “AS IS” data

What is the current way of working?

How can we measure this?

MEASURE MEASURE Understand realityUnderstand reality

DEFINEUnderstand

need of change

MEASUREUnderstand

reality

ANALYZEIdentify

root-causes


CONTROLMake it

stick

”What gets measured gets done”


Measure Phase - Key StepsMeasure Phase - Key Steps

Benchmark

Process map ”As Is”







2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1


K e y w o r d s :







L i n e m a n a g e r :

C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )








2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1


K e y w o r d s :







L i n e m a n a g e r :

C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )


Measurement system validation

Process measurements

request

for changecustomer

estimation for

level of

importanceexecute

change?1

think of

alternatives

1adjust design

specifications

New features

design

Test new

designProduce

customer

Old specifications New specifications

level of

importance

Yes 67%

No 33%

Alternatives

new specification new features

flawless design changed

product

review

specifications file

“Change of product

specifications”

request

for changecustomer

estimation for

level of

importanceexecute

change?1

think of

alternatives

1adjust design

specifications

New features

design

Test new

designProduce

customer


level of

importance

Yes 67%

No 33%

Alternatives

new specificationnew

features


product

review

specifications file


specifications”

Accurate and

precise

Precise but not accurat

e

Accurate but not precise

Not accurat

e or precise

A measurement system is comparable to throwing darts at a target. There are two categories of error…

Project charter

Process maps, Sampling, Data collection, Capability analysis, MSA, BenchmarkProcess maps, Sampling, Data collection, Capability analysis, MSA, BenchmarkTools:Tools:

DefineDefine the task and its financial impact






Identify key root-causes Verify influence on goal

Analyze gap to wanted position Assess change capabilities

Verify influence on goal

What are the key root-causes or contributors?

How do they influence the goal fulfillment?

ANALYZE ANALYZE Identify root-causesIdentify root-causes

DEFINEUnderstand

need of change

MEASUREUnderstand

reality

ANALYZEIdentify

root-cause


CONTROLMake it

stick

”Study the past, shape the future”

Company B

0 . 0

10 0 . 0

2 0 0 . 0

3 0 0 . 0

4 0 0 . 0

5 0 0 . 0

6 0 0 . 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7

0

10

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TR

X

RA

X

ET

M4

CU

ET

MC

ET

M1

RF

IF

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TR

X

RA

X

ET

M4

CU

ET

MC

ET

M1

RF

IF

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k

Company B

0 . 0

10 0 . 0

2 0 0 . 0

3 0 0 . 0

4 0 0 . 0

5 0 0 . 0

6 0 0 . 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7

0

10

2 0

3 0

4 0

5 0

6 0

7 0




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TR

X

RA

X

ET

M4

CU

ET

MC

ET

M1

RF

IF

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

MC

PA

SC

B

AIU

TR

X

RA

X

ET

M4

CU

ET

MC

ET

M1

RF

IF

TX

GP

B

Fan

Oth

e

BB

IF

PC

U

PS

U

Bac

k


Analyze Phase - Key StepsAnalyze Phase - Key Steps

Analysis of causes

Found areas to address

50454035

130

120

110

100

90

Putts

S co re

Y = 3 3. 1 28 4 + 1. 67 5 46 X

R-Squared = 0.906

Scatter Plot/Fitted Line Regression

Reliable process measurements

request

for changecustomer

estimation for

level of

importanceexecute

change?1

think of

alternatives

1adjust design

specifications

New features

design

Test new

designProduce

customer


level of

importance

Yes 67%

No 33%

Alternatives


featuresflawless design

changed

product

review

specifications file


specifications”

!

Process maps, Capability analysis, Regression analysis, Hypothesis testing, Correlation analysisProcess maps, Capability analysis, Regression analysis, Hypothesis testing, Correlation analysisTools:Tools:







Identify “To-Be” process and test possible solutions

Plan and implement solution

Monitor progress

• Identify possible solutions to address key contributors

• Perform cost/benefit evaluation• Perform solution risk analyses• Test solution

• Mobilize broad commitment• Plan implementation • Competence and resource

allocation• Create & follow-up Process & IT

demands• Execute implementation plan• Embed changes in management

system

• Monitor improvement progress & people commitment

• Will you fulfill the goal with selected solution?

• How do you implement thiswith people commitment?

• How do you track progress?

request

for changecustomer

estimation for

level of

importanceexecute

change?1

think of

alternatives

1adjust design

specifications

New features

design

Test new

designProduce

customer


level of

importance

Yes 67%

No 33%

Alternatives


features


product

review

specifications file


specifications”

150100500

2

1

0

-1

-2

Observation Number

Indi

vidu

al V

alue

I Chart for C205

12

2

2

2

22

2

2

22

2

22

1

222

11

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

Mean=0

UCL=1,5

LCL=-1,5

DEFINEUnderstand

need of change

MEASUREUnderstand

reality

ANALYZEIdentify

root-causes


CONTROLMake it

stick

IMPROVE IMPROVE Make it happenMake it happen

”Words don’t move mountains. People do.”


Improve Phase - Key StepsImprove Phase - Key Steps

Implementation plan

Cost/savingsanalysis of solutions Implementation fulfilled?Resource allocation

Risk analysis of solutions

Improve TG2 Decision Timeplan (Improve-Control)


Root-Cause analysis perf. gap

Goal review Analyze of data

Analyze

Cause& Effect relations (7MT)

Benchmark others

Measurement system analysis

Start to measure Data collection plan

Process map "As Is"Measure

TG1 Decision Milestone plan

Risk analysis Communication plan

Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case

Goal statement


Baseline estimation Problem stated

Define 13121110987654week

Found areas to address

request

for changecustomer

estimation for

level of

importanceexecute

change?1

think of

alternatives

1adjust design

specifications

New features

design

Test new

designProduce

customer


level of

importance

Yes 67%

No 33%

Alternatives


features


product

review

specifications file


specifications”

INSTRUCTIONINSTRUCTION

INSTRUCTION

Savings Costs

Process maps, Cost/benefit template, FMEAProcess maps, Cost/benefit template, FMEATools:Tools:






Severity x Occurrence x Detection

= RPN (Risk Priority Number)


Validate results Secure sustainability Transfer good practice

• Validate improvement effect• Evaluate lesson learned

• Anchor & handshake solution ownership

• Ensure competence capability for new way of working/solution

• Ensure mechanism for continuous monitoring and improvements

• Communicate results• Transfer good practices• Celebrate achievements

Has the goal been fulfilled? Will the solution stick? Can someone else benefit from your experiences?

DEFINEUnderstand

need of change

MEASUREUnderstand

reality

ANALYZEIdentify

root-causes


CONTROLMake it

stick

CONTROL CONTROL Make it stickMake it stick

” When yesterday's future becomes business as usual.”


Control Phase - Key StepsControl Phase - Key Steps

Learning's& best practice transfer

Resultsvalidated towards goal statement

Implementation fulfilled?

Responsibility transfer

Are solution robust?

Celebrate

W0509W0452W0442W0430W 0420W 0410Week

11

Mean=1,652UCL=4,220

LCL=-0,9170

1 2 3

15

10

5

0

Mov

ing

Ran

ge

1

R=0,9658

UCL=3,156

LCL=0

1 2 3

Delivery Precision Supplier 2004-2005w17

Observation

Indiv

idual V

alu

e

9181716151413121111

95

90

85

80

75

70

65

60

55

_X=80,99

UCL=92,64

LCL=69,34

1 2

I Chart of Total by process by Process

2005-08-29

SPC, P-diagramSPC, P-diagramTools:Tools:







DMAIC DMAIC ChartChartC

om

pre

hen

sive

Lig

ht

DefineUnderstand the task and its financial impact.

• Task selection matrix • SMART review • Stakeholder map• Risk Management

• SWOT analysis• Process map• VOC and break down to CTQs• 7MT• Affinity diagram

MeasureDevelop and execute an appropriate data collection method.

• Process map• Data collection table •Pareto diagram

• 7QCT• Measurement system analysis• Sampling technique• SIPOC• Gauge R&R, Gauge attribute• Capability analysis• Benchmark • Tagushi loss functions

AnalyzeFind the root causes.

• Fishbone diagram• Correlation analysis

• 7QCT• Hypothesis testing• Regression-analysis• DOE• Anova• 7MT• Data transformations• Simulations

ImproveGenerate and implement solutions.

• FMEA risk analysis• Process map

• Poka-Yoke• Hypothesis testing• Loss functions• Cost/Benefit selection•Pugh Concept Selection

ControlEnsure that the results will last.

• Documentation, standardization and training

• 7QCT• SPC• Business case verification


Six ways to fail…Six ways to fail…

… D … I D … I D … I

… M … A M … A M … A

M … A M … A D D

M … A M … A D D I I

D D D D… … … …

… I … D I … D I … D


Key elements for a DMAIC Key elements for a DMAIC projectproject

Has a measurable and verifiable result.Has a measurable and verifiable result. Cut cost in...Cut cost in... Reduce lead-time in…Reduce lead-time in… Reduce variation in...Reduce variation in... Improve quality in...Improve quality in...

Able to be defined by Y=f (xAble to be defined by Y=f (x11, x, x22, x, x33….. x….. xnn)) Possible influencing factors is...Possible influencing factors is... They can be controlled by...They can be controlled by... Or you can make the Y robust to them by…Or you can make the Y robust to them by…

Has a significant impact.Has a significant impact. Is important to the business, organization etc.Is important to the business, organization etc.


01 six sigma concept

Documents

sigma concept

dosix sigmasix sigma

peter hyhnen ericsson

proven quality tools

tvs8080 quasar reports

operational excellence

operational leaders

hour unsafe drinking