Six Sigma Projects

Are we achieving breakthrough improvement?

by Praveen Gupta

Six Sigma is being implemented at more and more corporations. After a significant investment in training, corporations initiate projects. Six Sigma Champions have told me that some companies have several thousand projects in the pipeline. Managing that many projects is a major task. How many projects should a corporation have in the pipeline? How much improvement should one expect from Six Sigma?

Breakthrough improvement used to be associated with Six Sigma. Today, most projects seem to be geared toward driving improvement. There’s nothing wrong with this approach, but I wonder if we’re able to get the most out of applying such a rigorous approach with expensive resources to improvement projects. Some may argue that Six Sigma works because it helps companies save money. I would be curious to know if it saved enough money to be shared with all employees. Did performance improve dramatically enough for people to see the improvement? Did it make people’s lives easier at work? If we can’t answer these questions, we’re likely to be working on Six Sigma projects in a rote manner just for the sake of applying the DMAIC methodology. We grind projects out with statistical software, facts, data, Black Belts, and Green Belts, all the while hoping to see some statistically significant improvement through a T-test or F-test to justify the effort.

Such implementation of Six Sigma doesn’t generate excitement in a company. Cultural alteration becomes cultural altercation. My understanding of Six Sigma tells me that improvement realized through the rigor of Six Sigma methodologies must be unquestionably significant, must make the process look different, and generate enough savings to be shared with team members and still increase the corporate bottom line. The intent of Six Sigma is to improve quickly.

Why do we not achieve breakthrough improvement with every project? It depends upon the opportunities, expectations and goal setting; the optimal application of DMAIC; and creative thinking. I’ve noticed that generally we tend to seek any statistically significant improvement using conventional tools and the DMAIC discipline. One critical aspect of the Six Sigma methodology is the intellectual engagement of employees in challenging the status quo and imagining and seeking a different future state. Once we challenge the mere tweaking approach, we look for much higher performance levels.

Suppose we want to increase our income by five percent in the coming year. We can quickly come up with ideas—working overtime, anticipating an annual merit increase, or moonlighting. If, instead, our goal is to increase our income by 50 percent, it makes us really think. We don’t jump to the solution right away. Instead, we think of possibilities and alternatives, and we make choices. This is exactly how a Six Sigma team thinks when it sets goals for projects.

Aggressive goal setting challenges our conventional wisdom and expands our view of possible solutions. We really do have to think differently. In the end, we find some unique solution that gives us the desired breakthrough. We break a sweat and find a sweet solution. This is the exciting aspect of Six Sigma—breakthrough solutions, creative thinking, empowering teamwork, and demanding that the team leader make the team click. Success and the rewards and satisfaction of personal recognition make it all worthwhile. The extra dough is gravy.

About the author
Praveen Gupta, an early implementer of Six Sigma, consults in business performance improvement through Six Sigma, innovation, and the business scorecard. He is the author of Six Sigma Business Scorecard, Business Innovation in the 21st Century, Six Sigma Performance Handbook, and Stat Free Six Sigma. He is a regular columnist for InsideSixSigma and president of Accelper Consulting (www.accelper.com).