Editor’s note: In response to Kyle Toppazzini’s article, “Lean Without Six Sigma May Be a Failing Proposition,” published in the Sept. 27, 2012, issue of Quality Digest Daily, Rip Stauffer left the following observant comment.
I started my career in quality when the consulting world hadn’t yet split into specialist camps they called “Six Sigma” and “lean.” At that point in time, if people were doing anything programmatic, they were calling it something like total quality. People studied the seven tools, and the seven new tools, and the Toyota Production System, and statistical process control (SPC). We studied general systems theory and learned to do process research.
…
Comments
Rip gets it
Rip's comments are dead on the money. I don't want to use this opportunity to rehash old arguments but to simply point out that I believe we are better served when we start to focus on new and innovative ways to tackle quality management issues. This is not to dismiss the great innovations that we have seen over the last 100 + years in quality management but to suggest we steer the conversation into a new and forward looking direction.
Add new comment