Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ?
Dr. Rick L. Edgeman & Dr. David I. Bigio Quality Enhancement Systems & Teams Honors Program Robert H. Smith School of Business & A. James Clark School of Engineering University of Maryland College Park, Maryland 20742 Email: redgeman@rhsmith.umd.edu and bigio@eng.umd.edu
Spying Out the Land
We begin with the assumption that everyone knows what Six Sigma is. Even in this forum of quality professionals we know this to be untenable, though it seems likely that this is not the first time that readers have heard the term and that the spectrum of knowledge of and experience with Six Sigma is broad indeed. We believe this to be true because we live and breathe in the domain of quality professionals and quality-interested individuals and this is wholly consistent with our experience. Perhaps more reasonable to assume is that many readers of this forum have passions deeper about the nature and future of Six Sigma than warranted by their knowledge thereof. Is that such an absurd statement? Generalized to other domains, is this not simply human nature? We in the quality profession are as likely to be zealots as those in any field of endeavor – with our own “sects” complete with leaders, holy writ, and constructs of heresy. A zealot’s fervor is at times borne of brilliance and at times of inspiration, sometimes of diligence, sometimes of ignorance or arrogance, sometimes of fear – it depends on the zealot, doesn’t it. Besides – quality has become a very, very broad field with none of us all-knowing or all-wise and what we know about Six Sigma varies dramatically across the quality profession and from sect-to-sect and person-toperson. Therein lies the difficulty in having a healthy discourse about the future of Six Sigma: is it Heresy or Holy Writ? In brief, it is both and it is neither. Our attempt at discourse is based on the familiar saying “everything old is new again” and is conducted via historical metaphor. Thirty-five hundred years ago Moses deployed representatives from the twelve tribes of Israel into Canaan to “spy out the land and bring back a report.” (Numbers 13:1-33, Deuteronomy 1:1940). Moses gave specific directions to the spies prior to sending them into Canaan that required them to assess its peoples and their cities, demography and topography, whether the soil was fertile and the quality of its fruit. The spies were of one voice in reporting that the land was good – “flowing with milk and honey” – but agreed that massive barriers to possessing the land existed that ranged from fortified cities to giants. Discord arose when the topic of breeching those barriers came to the fore with ten of the spies espousing the belief that possessing the land was beyond reach or attainable at unacceptable costs and only two, Caleb and Joshua, professing faith that the land could be won at justifiable costs. Despite Moses’ admonitions to be strong and full of courage, the majority report led the people of Israel – estimated at perhaps 2,000,000 strong – to despair and consider a return to captivity in Egypt before wandering the desert for a generation with the result being that only Joshua and Caleb among the men of their generation of Israelites were allowed to cross the Jordan River and possess the land. While the reports of the spies were generally harmonious their assessments differed with the “strength and courage” of the two – Joshua and Caleb – leading them to different and richer destinies than those of the other ten. In some sense this is human nature and experience as well – that we will to being what we value.
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
1
Regard this as the report of two who were sent to “spy out the land of Six Sigma and bring back a report” to you and infer from our report whether we are among “The Ten”, are Caleb and Joshua, or have assessed the landscape differently. That determined, decide for yourself whether the soil is fertile or fallow, its fruit bitter or sweet – and whether you will want to “go back to Egypt” (Numbers 14:3) or enter into the promised land (Joshua 3-4) of Six Sigma. Our initial report as spies in the land of Six Sigma is that it is rarely mapped objectively: either its borders are too close and it is regarded as a purely statistical approach to process improvement applicable only in tightly defined manufacturing settings or, conversely, it is seen as a panacea that can wield not only tangible, but optimal results wherever it is applied. That the high priests of Six Sigma are referred to in martial arts terms as Black Belts and Master Black Belts and its less experienced novitiates as Greenbelts may well contribute to this dichotomous mapping in that almost immediately there is a perceived Veil of Mystery behind which Six Sigma resides. Depending on the quality sect that one belongs to, what lies behind that Veil ranges from a sort black box approach to quality improvement worthy of the Wizard of Oz to the quality equivalent of the Holy of Holies.
They Might be Giants: Six Sigma as Heresy
Those who see Six Sigma as Heresy with the Wizard of Oz behind its Veil – The Ten – tend to regard Six Sigma as “smoke and mirrors” or as a fad – and quality has seen no fewer fads than other fields. Alternatively, many among The Ten regard Six Sigma as a small or insignificant part of the quality domain. The Ten may not all belong to the same sect and – just as each of the spies represented his tribe, so do the detractors of Six Sigma belong to many sects with names such as ISO 9000 or Business & Performance Excellence with each sect having staked out its territory and having contributed to the richness of the overall field of quality. Of course many in the quality profession do not belong to any single sect, but share in the wealth of several. Many reputable organizations including Raytheon, GE, Sun Microsystems and Bank of America vigorously apply Six Sigma strategies and methods. The followers of The Ten have heard the reports of dramatically improved performance from these and other organizations and the number of business sectors where Six Sigma is being applied is a growing one with
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ
government (Edgeman, Bigio and Ferleman, 2004) and healthcare (Edgeman, 2002) applications joining manufacturing, financial, information technology and other sectors. In many instances the followers of The Ten have believed the reports but … believe that their existing culture and systems (e.g. lean, ISO 9000, continuous improvement) are sufficient to meet their needs or … do not believe that the marginal benefit to the tribe (organization) of adopting Six Sigma justifies its costs or … do not understand Six Sigma and do not have the internal capability to assess its potential value to their tribe or … regard the costs of hiring, training and retaining Six Sigma talent as prohibitive in view of what they believe the returns will be or …are “service tribes” and do not see the applicability of Six Sigma since they don’t “make things” or … fear change for any of a variety of reasons, some of which may be valid. If you are from other than the “Six Sigma Tribe”, please know that we understand the possible contextual basis of many, but not all of these interpretations. Indeed, the historical text suggests that it was the voices of The Ten and their followers that led the Israelites to wander in the wilderness for 40 years before finally being permitted to cross
Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
2
the Jordan River and possess the land. In particular we regard the perspective of the “service tribes” as one in need of examination. Consider for example that in the United States only approximately 20% of business is manufacturing and of that 20% approximately 90% of employees are engaged in non-manufacturing activities such as marketing or accounting or shipping so that only about 2% of the collective U.S. labor force is directly involved in manufacturing. To limit the applicability of Six Sigma – or kaizen, or TQM, or SPC or, or, or – to such a narrow band is irrational. Instead we believe that it is of greater value to more fully map the landscape and borrow benchmarking’s rallying cry of “adapt, adopt, advance.” In other words, “innovate” as dictated by circumstances.
a project is neither too narrowly nor too broadly defined while effective project management is needed to avoid inordinate scope creep or calendar creep. Just as the Israelites consumed manna and quail in the wilderness, the followers of Caleb and Joshua adhere to Six Sigma diets with “high fat”, “high protein”, “low fat” or “balanced” diets among the approaches. High fat diet adherents may well ignore adverse reports and advocate across-theboard applicability of Six Sigma, adapting it in ways that may or may not appropriate its power. Advocates of Six Sigma low fat diets are more likely to follow “Six Sigma Lite” by applying it only in very narrowly defined circumstances. The balanced diet follower is apt to regard Six Sigma as preferable in some situations but prefer an alternative approach elsewhere, being less likely to “philosophize” about and creatively adapt Six Sigma. Consumers of the Six Sigma high protein diet seek synergies between Six Sigma and other key strategies and methods such as lean thinking (Womack and Jones, 2003). Of course there are other Six Sigma diets including the “starvation diet” of those who regard Six Sigma as heresy.
A Land Flowing with Milk and Honey: Six Sigma as Holy Writ
The followers of Caleb and Joshua have heard the same miraculous reports as The Ten, but may also have tasted the honey and drank the milk of Six Sigma, carried the ark containing its holy writ through the wilderness, and interpret what lies behind the veil as a sort of quality “holy of holies”. The eyewitness accounts are often dramatic indeed with documented cases supporting high returns on investment (ROI), defect reduction or elimination, cycle time reduction, waste reduction, market share gain, significant product or process improvement or innovation, customer satisfaction increase and the like. These are not the only results of Six Sigma programs and application however and documented failures have also occurred, though it is a simpler thing to locate stories of success than of failure. As with failures of other methods, at the root of Six Sigma failures one commonly finds poorly scoped projects, poor project management, or use of Six Sigma when another method might have proved a better match. Effective project scoping requires experience and skill so that
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ
Journey into the Future
Energizing Six Sigma are its breakthrough improvement and design approaches, DMAIC (Define-Measure-AnalyzeImprove-Control) and DFSS (Design for Six Sigma). These are sensible and highly structured problem-solving approaches that are an easy fit with other such approaches that may be more familiar such as statistical hypothesis testing or PDSA (Plan-Do-StudyAct) or any common formal approach to benchmarking. Similarly, many of the tools and approaches made use of by Six Sigma are familiar ones with quality function deployment, benchmarking, failure modes and effects analysis, designed experiments, and the seven “old tools” and seven “new tools” of quality prominent among these.
Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
3
These commonalities have led many to question whether there is “anything new” to Six Sigma, and whether it is a part of TQM or distinct (Klefsjö, Wiklund and Edgeman, 2000). That said it is the opinion of your spies that Six Sigma is more “innovative” than “creative” – more a new arrangement and emphasis of pre-existing strategies and methods than something altogether new – so that with all due respect to the various sects involved, the report from your spies is one of a more ecumenical tenor. Moses recognized distinctions between the tribes of Israel and apportioned the land accordingly. He did not “rank” the tribes and similarly we do not “rank” the various quality sects such as Six Sigma, ISO 9000, business and performance excellence, and the like. Indeed, just as intermarriage among the tribes was common, so too do we recognize, promote and anticipate discovery of meaningful synergies among these and other areas. Discovery of meaningful synergies requires a benchmarking or identification of key or best aspects from various approaches. In keeping with that belief we accept that there are aspects of Six Sigma that are superior. One such aspect would be the “reverse” view of the SIPOC business model (Suppliers-Inputs-Processes-OutputsCustomers) that regards it as COPIS wherein the voice of the customer (VOC) is used to identify the needed outputs; knowledge of those outputs is used in turn to configure processes capable of providing those outputs; those processes require specific inputs and knowledge of the needed inputs assists in identifying appropriate suppliers. Following that line, Six Sigma emphasizes acquisition of the clear VOC and distillation thereof into critical-to-quality (CTQ) characteristics, translation into actionable information and ultimately delivery of superior processes, products and services that fulfill the VOC. Similarly, benchmarking can deliver superior competitive intelligence, business and performance excellence approaches can be
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ
exceptional in their assessment of the larger organizational landscape, quality function deployment can produce better products and accelerate the time required to get those products to market, and other “sects” also have much to contribute. What are some of the trends in place and developments that we should expect? We should anticipate that organizational resources will remain relatively scarce so that growth in the interface between and integration of Six Sigma and Lean Thinking should be anticipated. In its fledgling stage this is called “Lean Six Sigma” (George, 2002). While Six Sigma is notorious for its financial (economic) bottom-line orientation the world’s resources are also in limited supply so that what will be demanded will be increased focus on other bottom-lines such as the biophysical-environmental, societal, and technological (built environment) ones – the so-called BEST principles (Edgeman, 2000). This will motivate integration of BEST and Six Sigma to produce what we will call “BEST Six Sigma”. Consistent with our first two projections, we believe that increased demand for public sector accountability and its use of resources will exert pressure on governmental agencies to be better stewards. Given Six Sigma’s documented ability to deliver bottomline results, this will lead to increasing interest in and application of Six Sigma in the public sector. Given public sector environmental and societal responsibilities, let us call this “Lean BEST Six Sigma” and note that variations will occur in other than the public sector. Similarly, we are a world replete with healthcare woes that include runaway
Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
4
costs. In fact, the cost of poorly performing processes (CP 3) has been estimated at approximately 30% of America’s $1.3 trillion annual healthcare costs (DeFeo and Barnard, 2004). Mounting pressure to reduce these costs will accelerate application of Six Sigma strategies and methods in healthcare. Consumers are ever more demanding with seemingly insatiable designer appetites for “new and improved” offerings and short cycle times. This will lead to refinement of the various approaches used in so-called Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) and – again – integration with Lean Thinking. Let us call this “Lean Design”. As Six Sigma awareness grows, increasingly it will come to the attention of two key sorts of people: eclectics that will creatively adapt it in ways not previously seen and subject matter experts who will borrow what they need from Six Sigma to enrich their own area. Similarly, the reverse will take place with Six Sigma aficionados learning more of and adopting from other fields to strengthen Six Sigma. As such Six Sigma may in ways subsume other fields or, conversely, be subsumed. In the extreme we may see a sort of “ultimate triumph” or “macro Six Sigma” in that it may truly be applied to, rather than simply in the organization so that the meaning of “Six Sigma organization” will fundamentally change from its usage today to describe organizations that value and apply Six Sigma strategies and methods to ones that are fully culturally Six Sigma.
acknowledged as the organization in which Six Sigma bubbled up – recently had to ask for assistance from GE to reinvigorate its Six Sigma effort.
Hubri-Doobri-Doobri
Viewed holistically our forecasts – the forecasts of two spies – suggest that a melding will occur, but what will the result be called? In October 2003 we posed that question to a number of our colleagues with a response from Dr. John Dalrymple, professor and director of the Centre for Management Quality Research at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia capturing the essence of what we most often heard. His response was a humorous one, but one that we believe at its core to be ontarget. He suggested “hubri-doobri-doobri”, a saying from his native Scotland. When asked to expand on this name his response was brief, he said “it means that it will be called whatever it will be called” and we agree – it is not the name that matters, but the fruit of its application. That is fundamentally the report from your spies: that Six Sigma is a land flowing with milk and honey that is part of a larger, more global landscape. It has much to offer and it has borrowed much from other lands. Deftly applied and appropriately linked to other approaches, in the end it is capable of delivering what we desire of it – superior products, services and performance in less time, at lower cost, to the enrichment of society, and with no harm to the environment. Doesn’t that make you hungry? So … do you want to go back to Egypt, or do you want to enter the Promised Land of Six Sigma?
Of course, we should also expect that like many other strategies, tools and techniques that Six Sigma will fall out of favor with some – especially with those who are prone to constantly searching for a quick fix, a new high. Indeed, even Motorola –
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
5
References
De Feo, Joseph A. and Barnard, William W. (2004). Juran Institute’s Six Sigma Breakthrough and Beyond, McGraw-Hill: New York. Edgeman, Rick (2000), “BEST Business Excellence: An Expanded View”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 4, No. 4, 15-17. Edgeman, Rick (2002). “Six Sigma in Communities of Care: Improved Care via Institutionalized Genius”, Business Briefing: Global Healthcare, Vol. 2, 46-49, World Medical Association – 53rd General Assembly. London, UK. Edgeman, Rick, Bigio, David , and Ferlman, Thomas (2004). “Six Sigma or Business Excellence: Strategic and Tactical Examination of IT Service Level Management at the Office of the Chief Technology Officer of Washington, DC”, Quality & Reliability Engineering International, Vol. 20, No. & pp. pending. George, Michael L. (2002). Lean Six Sigma, McGraw-Hill, New York. Klefsjö, Bengt, Wiklund, Håkan Wiklund, and Edgeman, Rick (2001). “Six Sigma Seen as a Methodology for Total Quality Management”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 5, No. 1, 31-35. Thompson Chain-Reference Bible: New International Version (1990). B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co.: Indianapolis, Indiana Womack, James P. and Jones, Daniel T. (2003). Lean Thinking, Free Press: New York.
Authors
Rick L. Edgeman is QUEST Teaching Professor and Executive Director of the Quality Enhancement Systems & Teams (QUEST) Honors Program at the University of Maryland. Prior to joining Maryland he was a professor and director of the Center for Quality & Productivity Improvement at Colorado State University and has served as a visiting professor in the Quality & Innovation Research Group at the Aarhus School of Business (Denmark) and the Division of Quality & Environmental Management at Luleå University (Sweden). He has authored more than 60 articles that appear in leading journals in the areas of statistics, quality, reliability, and sustainable development. Quality Progress identified him as one of “21 New Voices of Quality for the 21st Century” in its January 2000 issue. David I. Bigio is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and QUEST Curriculum Director at the University of Maryland with degrees in Mechanical Engineering from MIT and Case-Western Reserve University. He is the recipient of multiple university teaching awards, numerous grants, has led many project teams and provides BEST Teams training as well as training in project scooping and management.
Six Sigma as Metaphor: Heresy or Holy Writ
Quality Progress, Volume 37, No. 1, January 2004
6