Statitsical Bullies

[PGS]

Hi,

 

Most professional mixup “Statistics” and   “Statistical Thinking”. This is the source of all these confusion that was expressed in the paper circulated by Jayant.

 

Some of the myth that Six Sigma Professionals and also aspirant carry are

 

1.    A good statistical software do a lot to them in becoming more efficient in their approaches to Six Sigma. The fact is that a tool is as good or as bad as one thinking process.

2.    Expert level Knowledge of statistics is must for six sigma.

 

In my view,

 

1.    It is good enough if people practice statistical thinking and use basic statistics (most of which is available in Excel)

2.    The entire team need not be good at stat. One or two can have reasonable knowledge and provide inputs through statistical think

3.    The quantity of data is less important. The source and consistency in data collection is more important.

 

Often we forget that the improvement process through six sigma starts with Business Language. It traverse through statistical language and has to come back to business language.

 

Thanks with regards

Subramaniam

________________________

Subramaniam P G

Asap Management Consultants Private Limited

45, Srinivasa Iyer Street

Aryagowda Road

West Mambalam, Chennai - 600 033

India

T: (91) (44) 42614528

M: (91) 9840096048 / 9382856186

p...@amc-india.com / p...@amc.co.in

www.amc-india.com

 

http://threadsofexcellence.blogspot.com/

 

LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/pgsubra

 

[Thothathiri, S]

Hi,

 

I agree with Mr Subramaniam comments on statistical thinking.

 

Statistical Thinking what I mean is:

 

• All work is a series of interconnected process
• All process are variable (Variation is evil)
• Understanding the variation is the basis for evidence – based management and systematic improvement

 

Rather than traditional approach of problem solving from Problem to Solution; statistical thinking is Practical problem -> Statistical problem -> Statistical solution -> Practical solution.

 

Learning the usage of Statistical tool is not enough, thinking in the above way of Problem solving is statistical thinking.

 

Regards

S.Thothathiri

+91 98403 95554

---

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "QualityFirst" group.
To post to this group, send email to qualit...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to qualityfirst...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/qualityfirst?hl=en.

**************************************************************************************** Note: If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. ****************************************************************************************

**************************************************************************************** Note: If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you. ****************************************************************************************

[Vijay Sharma]

I guess my views will be a little different and probably question the fundamentals of six sigma itself.

For one, I don't see anything wrong or evil in 'variation'. Variation is real and it is necessary. Ok, let me take this from a slightly higher perspective - "conformity" is not necessary...it is in fact counter-productive to stick to conformity the way 6sigma practitioners (including me) usually do... that's what I believe in.  

Coming to the specifics of statistics and 6sigma...at the end of the day 6sigma is a methodology built around certain philosophies which uses certain tools. So, if we are looking for a 'solution' to a problem using the 6sigma way we would be restricted by the limitations of the 6sigma philosophy. Similarly if we base our solutions on statistical theories and statistical thinking then we would be limited by the limits of statistics.

As an example, consider DMAIC...it works on an assumption that you HAVE to optimize. Now, if for me optimization is not good enough then DMAIC is useless...there came about DFSS based on design principles to solve this limitation...not all of which are statistically based. TRIZ for example helps you get away from that artificial limitation caused by DMAIC (yes I am aware of the argument that cost matters and all). But if you solely rely on TRIZ then you would lose out on something else that is a limitation of TRIZ. In essence, the moment we start glorifying a particular approach we should accept that we are limiting ourselves.

On the original point about the bullies, I would have liked the author to present the argument from a "we" perspective rather than "us and them". Because of taking such a perspective the author is probably claiming a moral ground...in fact the very way the author expressed his stuff (just like how I am expressing myself in this message) is an example of bullying, isn't it?

Vijay (being philosophical about the whole thing)

[PGS]

Dear All,

 

Just a few point from Vijay’s note. He has thrown interesting dimension. In fact, I do see that reflection in most managers and members in knowledge sector predominantly.

 

1.      “Conformance” and “Variation” are not antonyms. Presence of conformance does not indicate that variation does not exist. Variation is natural. The unwanted variation is what requires focus. DMAIC process or some statistical tools is required to be used to identify these unwanted variation.

2.      The problem happens when people want to use statistics or DMAIC for conformance. I had cases where organizations have chosen implementation of a software or a procedure as project for DMAIC. In variably such projects end before they make any headway.

3.      Using six sigma for conformity is in my view not correct. It may be used to look into variations in conformity if I may say so, like I was part of a project where there was variation in meeting the Pollution Control requirement in a particular process. DMAIC was used to work on this. Though this conformity is different from the conformity that was intended by Vijay.

4.      We must also appreciate that no tool can serve as panacea to our process problems. All tools, be it DMAIC, TRIZ  or any other, have their limitations. Their utility and success depend on

a.       Culture of organization

b.      Knowledge of the team and the leader of the project

5.      Force fitting any tool just because on is an expert in that tool is not good for organization. We will have to learn to adopt tool based on their strength and context to the application.

 

I am personally not the one who choose to fight for a tool in any process improvement. We must not make MEAN more important than the END. END can be achieved by different MEANS. All means are right as long as we use them appropriately and do not force fit. Finally just because a particular tool gave excellence result in a particular situation does nto necessarily makes it best under all circumstances.

 

Thanks with regards

Subramaniam

________________________

Subramaniam P G

Asap Management Consultants Private Limited

45, Srinivasa Iyer Street

Aryagowda Road

West Mambalam, Chennai - 600 033

India

T: (91) (44) 42614528

M: (91) 9840096048 / 9382856186

p...@amc-india.com / p...@amc.co.in

www.amc-india.com

 

http://threadsofexcellence.blogspot.com/

 

LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/pgsubra