 |
|
February 2003
Volume 2 • Number 2
GUEST EDITORIAL
The Softer Side of Six Sigma
By Deborah Hopen, editor, Journal of Quality and Participation and News for a Change
debbie@aqp.org
When Bill Smith developed the original Six Sigma methodology at Motorola, his focus was on creating a standardized measure of quality and a process for continuously improving processes associated with critical customer requirements. That methodology, along with Bob Galvin’s exceptional insight and leadership, became the essential component of Motorola’s success, leading to its recognition as one of the first Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award winners.
As Matt Barney pointed out in his article, “Motorola’s Second Generation” (p. 13), in the May 2002 issue of this magazine, Motorola has moved from counting defects in product manufacturing to managing variation and systematically improving its processes. Additionally, the scope of Six Sigma’s application has moved from being a tool for improving product quality to an overall business improvement methodology. The original four-step methodology—measure, analyze, improve and control—has been updated to five steps—define, measure, analyze, improve and control. Measurement using defects per million opportunities has been expanded. Metrics such as cycle time and capability indices now are used frequently.
From Six Sigma’s inception, there’s been much talk about statistical tools and project management techniques. Clearly these are critical components of successful Six Sigma application. Again in the May 2002 issue, Gerald J. Hahn’s article, “20 Key Lessons Learned” (p. 28), states, “Statistical and other tools form the backbone of Six Sigma … What has helped make Six Sigma powerful is the tools being imbedded into a process and immediately put to practical use.”
At the same time, however, Six Sigma relies on people to succeed. There are legions of anecdotes to demonstrate how committed executives such as Jack Welch have led their organizations to Six Sigma—and overall business—success. There are an equal number of tales of how fainthearted leaders have undermined Six Sigma implementation, leaving little doubt the support of senior executives is imperative.
Master Black Belts (MBB), Black Belts (BB) and Green Belts (GB) bring Six Sigma projects to fruition. They lead the change management process, and in my mind, that’s a far more thorny task than following the Six Sigma process steps, using the statistical tools or managing the project. After all, no matter how compelling the facts may be, most people are reluctant to change; they’ve grown so comfortable with the status quo they create phantom obstacles to resist change. Successful MBBs, BBs and GBs have the ability to turn resistance into forward momentum. Sometimes the solutions they’re recommending affect their own work processes, requiring them to practice what they preach. In these cases, the MBBs, BBs and GBs become role models by willingly adopting new approaches.
I believe successful Six Sigma deployment depends on the synergistic combination of soft and hard techniques. When creative thinking and an indomitable dedication to improvement are coupled with a structured problem solving approach and statistical tools, the potential for innovative solutions and better results appears almost limitless.
