Six Sigma Lessons from Deming, Part 2

Opinion

In Part 1 of this article I discussed Six Sigma failures and the fundamental flaws in the term Six Sigma, as seen in figure 1 below, which highlights the flaws in the hundreds of Six Sigma web sites displaying the nonsense of out-of-control processes that are the result of the claimed “unavoidable” 1.5 sigma drift.

Figure 1: The consequences of Six Sigma’s +/–1.5 sigma shift that Mikel Harry claims for every process—a process wildly out of control.

…

Want to continue?

By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.

Create a FREE account

Forgot My Password

Comments

Sorry, Anthony, but you

Sorry, Anthony, but you misunderstand what Dr. Deming meant when criticizing numerical goals, you misunderstand Mikel Harry, and you've got the explaination of the 1.5 sigma shift wrong. Love your passion, though.

Tom Pyzdek

The 1.5 sigma shift scam

Mr Pyzdek,There is no "misunderstanding" of the utter farce of the +/-1.5 sigma drift/shift/correction that forms the "six sigma" of "Six Sigma". For a full description of the origins of this blatant nonsense, please read my papers here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/blame-mr-bill-smith-tony-burns/

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/six-sigma-psychology-part-2-tony-burns/

You might also read why Dr Wheeler, the world's greatest process statistician, calls your +/-1.5 sigma shift "goofy"

https://www.spcpress.com/pdf/DJW177.pdf

Dr Burns