Hi Mike,

Great article. Unfortunately logic has no effect on religions. I've just about given up. Scores of ignorant masses still flock to sites like isixsigma.com with the same old farcical questions and even more fanciful replies, while the forums like Deming wilt.

I still see a great parallel in six sigma and global warming. Both are religions based on utter nonsense. It amazes me how the masses still believe the world is warming when global temperatures have been falling for 10 years and even the IPCC 2007 fails to publish temperature from its own Working Party No1 after 1998. Six Sigma is no different. No one looks at the facts. The data is irrelevant ! Bow down to the great gods of Six Sigma and global warming !!

Good luck !

Best regards,

Dr Tony Burns

Thanks for a laugh, but not much more.. How is another tiny collection of anecdotes and tired observations considered newsworthy? Although it would be my own 30 minutes of fun to pick apart each point, I'll limit myself to (what seems like) your key points:

1. The Certification Process - maybe you don't these very often, since your comment on the shallow (ie, crammable book knowledge) nature of the testing applies not merely to ASQ, but to almost every other certification on the planet. Try taking a PMP - I found it doubly liable to being passed based on a 4 hour cram session. In fact, take any university exam on the planet and the same applies; so your pithy and never-before-heard observation about CSSBB certification may actually be related to the entire approach of certifying based on knowledge alone?.. but you're an improvement professional so let's hear your suggestion on better options.

2. An Elitist System - well you've already answered this by alluding to the same problem in Lean with senseis. In fact ANY programme that has specialists has this liability, but only if you're referring to hopelessly misdirected deployments with no change management, no engagement of the workforce, no skills development for the shopfloor, etc. The fact that the same criticism has been applied to MBAs for decades should also not sway your thinking that this is a Six Sigma evil..

3. Training is Wasteful - you could think this one through a little more. Are more people typically trained that have the time and business scenarios to apply 6s? Yes. Would the same issue apply to taking first-aid lessons? Yes. Do people learn a vast Body of Knowledge only to apply 5% of it at any one time? Yes. Would the same issue apply to a Doctor seeing his usual schedule of patients? Yes. Sorry, no new insight here, and in fact nothing that is problematic when you view training as an integral part of employee development. But you're a consultant so what you're really peddling is A Better Way Out Of This Mess so you need a Mess to fix.

4. Achieving 3.4 DPMO By Abuse - um, try reading every (or any) good reference on 6s to see how universally this is a known liability, and how any Black Belt worth her salt will shun fudging the numbers because (guess what) you don't get a quality outcome, you don't improve customer delight, and you don't create value by doing so, in fact you get caught pretty quickly. Perhaps you should try creating a track record of 6s projects to see how long you'd last trying the Success By Fudge approach.

5. Simpler Approaches (ie 7 Quality Tools) - no disagreement here, but here's your moment of zen - how does a consultant who specialises in DoE and SPC advocate the 7M tools for 95% of improvements? Do your billable hours come from teaching scatter plots and implementing check sheets? If not, and if you do still in fact use DoE/SPC/etc then your own argument is dead in the water - 6s includes exactly the same type and complexity of tool across the board. If you look harder, you might realise that your problem isn't with Six Sigma, but with the philosophy of applying statistics to industrial problems, since 6s is a mere wrapper - a toolbox of sorts. If your problem with with using advanced tools is industry, you should perhaps spend a few moments talking this through with a professor in any business school; in return you'll get a brief education in how the past 100 years might prove you wrong.

And the list goes on..

Suffice to say, whilst rehashing the same old criticisms and offering little in the way of new personal insight, you've also conveniently glossed over the considerable benefit and strategic success that comes from 6s programmes, as well as destroyed some of your own credibility in the process. I mean you made it blatantly clear that the motivation for your foray into 6s was not from a desire to grow your own knowledge, but due to clients locking you out. I can assume your psychology went instantly into fault-finding and why you've always been a super consultant and how could clients possibly be sucked in by this new fangled guff when what you've done for years has been just fine.

If I've been harsh let me just say that there's nothing wrong with a balanced thought piece, and 6s has PLENTY of problems, but look at any quoted Lean/TOC/ISO success rate and you'll see they're all under 20-30% so again, there's nothing unique about 6s to merit picking on it as you've done, and nothing in your article provides readers with a balanced education on how to better themselves or their operations. Sorry.