Min - 310 Taguchi 6 Sigma Benchmarking PDF

MIN-310 Quality Management (Dvivedi- 4/13/2019
For limited Circulation)
MIN-310
Taguchi’s Methodology
Six Sigma Methodology
Benchmarking
Instructor – Dr. Akshay Dvivedi

2018-2019
This material is for classroom discussion and teaching only
Six Sigma
Six Sigma is a methodology focused on creating

breakthrough improvements by managing
variation and reducing defects in processes
across the enterprise.
SIPOC Customer’s View
Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV

Company’s View
Product/Service
This material is for teaching and

classroom discussion only 1
Cost of poor quality Fig. 1 Cost of poor quality versus Sigma level
as % of earnings
30%
20%
10%
0%
3 4 5 6 7
Sigma Level
Six Sigma Process

– A Six Sigma process is one that has at least six standard deviations
between the process mean and the nearest specification limit when
centred.
Lower Design Specification Upper Design Specification

+/- 6 sigma 99.99996% *
1.5 1.5
Mean Value
*Distribution shifted +/- 1.5
4

Six Sigma as a Metric


   ( x  x)
i
2
Sigma =  = Deviation n 1
( Square root of variance )
Axis graduated in Sigma

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
1
2
3
5
6
7
0
4
between + / - 1 68.27 % 317300 ppm outside (deviation)
between + / - 2 95.45 % 45500 ppm
between + / - 3 99.73 % 2700 ppm
between + / - 4 99.9937 % 63 ppm
between + / - 5 99.9943 % 57 ppm
between + / - 6 99.99966 % 3.4 ppm
Translating capability into "rejects"
USL - LSL 6 8 10  12

Cp 1.00 1.33 1.66 2.00
Rejects 2700 ppm 64 ppm 0.6 ppm 0.002ppm
% of spec used 100 75 60 50
at Z = -4.5, CDF = 0.0000034

!

History of Six Sigma
•Six Sigma had its birth at Motorola in 1979.
•Developed by Mikel Harry.
•A quantum leap in manufacturing technology

occurred at Motorola when it applied Six Sigma.
•Within four years, Six Sigma had saved the

company $2.2 billion.
What is Six Sigma ?
• Measure of how well a process is performing
-6 process produces 3.4 DPMO
- Most companies are at 3-4 level
• Philosophy of reducing defects - improve customer

satisfaction and reduce costs
• Business Strategy that increases process performance

CONCEPT OF SIX SIGMA

• Approach to continually improve and reduce variations
in the process that contribute to waste and poor quality.
• It is a measure of how well a process is performing.
Focus on not making mistakes (Mistake proofing)
• 6s is a well structured, data driven methodology for
eliminating defects, waste, or quality control problems
of all kinds in every area.
• 6 properly implemented will
• Improve customer satisfaction,
• Significantly improve quality,
• Improve the way we launch new products, and
• Create a continuous improvement mindset.
Six Sigma Management Approach
• “A disciplined method of using extremely

rigorous data gathering and statistical
analysis to pinpoint sources of errors and ways
of eliminating them”
Harry & Schroeder, 2000
Contd….

• Six Sigma is both a philosophy and a goal

• Focus on continuous improvement through customer satisfaction
• Critical processes at 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO)
– The focus is not on DPMO but on a systematic method to

reduce variability within the manufacturing process
– Six Sigma projects are lead by individuals selected and

trained in the application of this systematic method
– Requires clear definition of roles and responsibilities

• Green belt, Black belt, Master Black belt, Management Executive

The Six Sigma team


The Six Sigma team
• Own vision, direction, Integration, results

The Six Sigma team Executive Leadership • Lead change
• Project owner • Internal team support

Part-time
• Black Belt managers • Help Black Belts
Green Belts
Project Champions
Master Black
Black Belts
Belts
• Full time • Devote 50% - 100% of time to Black Belt activities

• Train and coach • Facilitate and practice problem solving
Black and Green Belts • Train and coach Green Belts and project teams
• Statistical problem solving experts

Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox
Fundamental Themes of
Six Sigma
• Six Sigma is based around a number of central
themes
– A genuine focus on the customer
– Data and fact driven Management
– Team based problem solving projects
– Process focus, management & improvement
– Proactive management
– Drive for perfection, tolerance for failure
Contd….

Six Sigma
• A genuine focus on the customer
– Six Sigma measures start with customer satisfaction
– Emphasis on understanding customer expectations and
requirements
• Data and fact driven Management

– Speaking with data (not opinions!)
– Management decisions based on fact
– Develop understanding of internal processes
Contd….
Six Sigma
• Process focus, management & improvement
– Understanding the process is the key aspect
– Control the inputs, and improve process
• Proactive management
– Understanding of Six Sigma principles
– Defining the root cause of problems
– Setting and maintaining aggressive improvement targets
– Challenging ‘why’ things are done this way
Contd….

Six Sigma
• Team based collaboration
– Six Sigma is teamwork focused
– Project lead by process expert
– Facilitated by Six Sigma Black Belt
– Multi-skill experts within project team
• Drive for perfection, tolerance for failure

– Being prepared to fail during improvement
– Understanding why something failed
– Improving it next time
Six Sigma
Supporting Evidence
• General Electric started to use Six Sigma in 1995
• Total savings estimated to be $750 million by 1998
• Over 10,000 GE managers and employees have been trained in Six
Sigma methods
• AlliedSignal/Honeywell started Six Sigma

improvement in the early 1990s
• Estimated to be saving over $600 million PA
• Market value increased by compounded 27% pa
• “Its changed the way we think and communicate. We never used to
talk about the process or the customer, now they’re part of our
everyday conversation”

Six Sigma
Supporting Evidence
• Motorola established the first Six Sigma
improvement programme in 1987
• Used to track and compare customer requirements
• Over the ten years 1987-97
– Five-fold increase in sales
– Profits increasing at nearly 20% per year,
– Share price equal annual increase of over 21% per year
– Cumulative savings based on Six Sigma at over $17 billion
(1986-2004)
Key 6 Tools & Methods

Statistical 7 Quality
Process Control Control Tools
Design of
Experiments Balanced
Scorecards
Process Design/
Six Sigma
Redesign Voice of the
Customer
Continuous
Improvement Creative
Process Thinking
Management

Six Sigma
Improvement Strategy
Existing Product
• Phase 0: Process Definition
• Phase I: Process Measurement
• Phase II: Process Analysis
• Phase III: Process Improvement
• Phase IV: Process Control
23
DMAIC
Six Sigma Improvement Model
24

Six Sigma
Improvement Strategy
New Product
• Phase 0: Define
• Phase I: Measure
• Phase II: Analyse
• Phase III: Design
• Phase IV: Verify
25
Six Sigma
The four fundamentals
• Process … Everything Is Process
• Correlation … Y=f(x1, x2, x3)
• Discipline … DMAIC
• Data … All Learning Resides In It
It Responds to Change By Driving Out Variation
26

Focus of Six Sigma
Focus our behavior on the Y or X ?
If we are good at X why do we constantly test and inspect

Y?
27
DMAIC
28

DMAIC
29
DMAIC
30

DMAIC
31
DMAIC
32

Six Sigma & TQM: Complementary or Conflict?
• Many of the objectives of TQM are echoed within the Six Sigma
approach
• Focus on customers
• Team based activity
• Dependent on people
• Produces an improved business position
Differences
• Focused on hard ‘process based’ deliverables
• Precise definition and simple message
• Cross functionality of approach
• Well defined project time-scales
• Well defined project structure
• Well defined training objectives
Current Business System + Six Sigma = TQM

33
Benefits of Six Sigma Projects
• Reduced cycle time.

• Increased productivity and added value.
• Improved capacity and output.
• Reduced total defects.
• Increased product reliability.
• Decreased work in progress.
• Improved process flow.
• Faster return on investment.
• Improved overall customer satisfaction.
34

Summary
• Six Sigma
- It is different
- It works if you follow the process
- Produces significant bottom line results
• Change is required by all persons who get
involved with the initiative
• Six Sigma will last as long as it produces bottom
line results.
35
Case Study
Bombay Tiffenwallas
36

28
37
Case Study
Bombay Tiffenwallas
(Source: Forbes Magazine)
Bombay Tiffanwallas (Raghunath Medge – president)
- They make
one Error on every 16 millions transactions
5000 Tiffanwallas deliver 2,00,000 lunches
everyday and take the empty tiffin back
- They make
one mistake in 2 month
2,00,000x2(transaction per day) x30 (days)=12,000,000
12,000,000x2 months= 24,000,000 (24 millions)
38

Case Study
Bombay Tiffenwallas
(Source: Forbes Magazine)
The charge for this service = Rs. 500/- pm
Tiffenwallah income= Rs 10,000/- pm
Takeaways are passion, commitment, consistency,
100% execution, accuracy, dedication, time
management and customer satisfaction
Superb!!!
Service and Excellence -----------
“Can anyone ask for more????”
39
THANKS!!!
40

Taguchi Method of Quality Engineering
41
GENICHI TAGUCHI
• Born in Japan, 1924
• Electrical Engineer
• Worked during 1950’s to improve Japan’s post-WWII

telephone communication system…
• Father of the “Taguchi Method” and “Robust

Engineering”

Taguchi’s Method
•Taguchi Method emphasize the attainment of

the specified target value and the elimination
of variation
• The method was first applied in 50’s in Japan
• Introduced in 80’s in US…
• Ford motor company took the lead and
applied the concepts for product / process
development in 1990
43
Quality
“Being within specifications”
“Conformance to requirements”
“Fitness for use”…
“Customer satisfaction”

Taguchi on Quality
• Taguchi defines quality as:

“the loss imparted to society from the time a product is
shipped to the customer”
• Taguchi is first to articulate that:

“No amount of inspection will ever improve the quality of a
product.”…
• Quality must be “engineered in” since it cannot be
• • “inspected out.”
Taguchi focuses mostly on

Off-Line Quality Control
Off-Line Quality Control =

Improving Quality and Reducing Total Cost
right in the Design Stage
46

Total Cost
it includes the cost of problems in manufacturing
and the cost of problems in the field.
47
Philosophy of the Taguchi’s Method
• Quality should be designed into the product and

not inspected into it
• Quality is best achieved by minimizing the

deviation from the target
• The cost of quality should be measured as a

function of deviation from the target

Concept of Quality
Loss
• Traditional concept:
– Good in the limit and bad
outside the limit Pass Fail
– Step function m m m
– loss off the limit
• Taguchi concept: Loss

– Good only at target
– Continuous, quadratic
loss even within limit
– penalizes a product for m m m 
being “off target
This represents a paradigm shift in the way in which
companies measure the “goodness” of a product
Case Example: SONY Color TV
• Ashi Newspapers on April 17, 1979 reported that:

– Identical sets were assembled in Japan & US with same
design, same parts and same process control
– US customers preferred TV’s assembled in Japan to those

assembled in US, because of better color
– No sets assembled in US was out of specs while 0.3% of

sets assembled in Japan shipped was out of specs, thus
defective.

SONY Color TV (Cont’d)
• Color density distribution:
Taguchi’s Quality Loss Function

• Loss function: L(y) = * (y - m)2 within operational limits
m is the target value, k is constant, y is
actual value of characteristic
• Then: L(y) = 0 at the target where y = m
Loss to Society L(y)
52

Determination of Manufacturing Tolerance

Ao = Associated loss at customers tolerance m ±
B = Cost of repair prior to shipping at Manufacturers tol. δ
L(y) = * (y - m)2 then L(y) = Ao where y = m ± and
beyond
Ao = * is the scrap or rework cost, (y-m) is tolerance
L(y) = (y-m)2
Ao = k (o)2
A
k 0
2
0
B A
L( y )  0
{ y  m}
2
2
0
m- m+
53
Example
Calculate the average loss per unit to a manufacturing company if
deviation is 0.00, 0.01, 0.02 when specifications on a part dimensions are
0.50 ± 0.02 cm. The cost for return/replacement is Rs. 50 for parts with
dimensions of 0.48 or 0.52 (i.e., 0.50 ± 0.02).
L(y) = (y-m)2, here tolerance is 0.02, i.e., (y-m) = (0.02)
L(y) = Rs. 50 or = 125,000
Loss function for a single part is L(y) = 125,000 (y-m)2
when deviation = 0.00, the L(0.00)= 125,000(0)2= Rs. 0 per part

when deviation = 0.01, the L(0.01)= 125,000(0.010)2= Rs. 12.50 per part
when deviation = 0.02, the L(0.02)= 125,000(0.020)2= Rs. 50 per part
If we set L(y) to be Rs. 2 and solve for (y-m)2, We get:

2= 125,000 (y-m)2 or (y-m) = 0.004
If dimension is more than 0.004 away from target, it is more economical to
adjust it at factory and specs. should be set as 0.5 ± 0.004

Example
• A company received an average of 10 complaints per month
last year. In November they received 15 complaints (y).
Management sets an acceptable level at 2 (tolerance).
• It costs the company ₹ 50 directly per complaint to correct

the problems. They determined that cost in lost sales to be
₹ 100
• Total cost per complaint: ₹ 150
Example Continued…
= ₹ 150/22 = ₹ 37.50
L(y) = 37.50 (15-10)2

= 37.50 (5)2
= 37.50 (25)
= ₹ 937.50 is loss for the
month of November

Classification of Quality Characteristics
• Nominal value is the best:

Example: Diameter of a shaft Ao
L(y) = * (y-m)2 m- m m+ y
• The smaller, the better:

Example: Impurity in drug Ao
y
L(y) = * y2  
S/N LB  10log 1  y 2j 
R
R 
• The larger, the better:
j1
Ao
Example: Strength of structure
y
L(y) = / y2  
S/N   10log  1  1 
R
R y 
HB 2
j1
j
57
3 Steps of Taguchi Design Process
• Taguchi advocates a 3 step,

off-line quality control method
for product/process design
Step 1. System Design
– concept design and synthesis
Step 2. Parameter Design

– parameter sizing to ensure
robustness to variations
Step 3. Tolerance Design
– establish product and process
tolerances to minimize variation

3 Steps of Taguchi Design Process
System Design: The focus of the system design phase is on determining the
suitable working levels of design parameters. It includes designing and testing a
system based on engineer's judgment of selected materials, parts and nominal
product/process parameters based on current technology. Thus it helps to
identify the working levels of the design parameters
Parameter design: It seeks to determine the parameter levels that produce the
best performance of the product/process under study. The optimum condition is
selected so that the influence of uncontrollable factors causes minimum
variation to system performance. The orthogonal arrays, variance and signal to
noise analysis are the essential tools of parameter design.
Tolerance design: It is a step to fine tune the results of parameter design by
tightening the tolerance of parameters with significant influence on the product.
Parameter Design (Robust Design)
• The objective in robust design is

to improve the quality of a product by minimizing the
effects of variation without eliminating the causes
(since the causes are either too difficult or too expensive
to control)
The end result is a robust design, i.e.,

– a design that has minimum sensitivity to variations in
uncontrollable factors
60

Steps
• Identify the problem / response characteristic
• Conduct Brainstorming Sessions to identify the various factors
• Develop a Cause and Effect Diagram
• Classify the factors as control, noise, or signal
• Conduct Pareto Analysis for vital parameters (down sizing)
• Select the experimental range of factors
• Decide the Orthogonal Array for Control factors as well as for
noise factors
• Conduct experiments
• Analyze the results
• Find optimum setting (Robust Setting of Parameters)
• Confirm the results
61
Classification of Factors
Control Factors
Design factors that are to be set at optimal levels to improve quality and
reduce sensitivity to noise
Noise Factors
Factors that represent the noise that is expected in production or in use
Adjustment Factors
Affects the mean but not the variance of a response
Signal Factors
Set by the designer to communicate desires of the user
62

Orthogonal Array (L8 (27))
Number of Factors
LN (2k)
Total Number of Runs Number of Levels Per Factors
63
Taguchi’s Orthogonal Array

Tables
• 2-level arrays • 5-level array
– L4 (23). L8 (27), L16 (215) – L25(56)
L32 (231), L64 (263) • Mixed-level arrays
• 3-level arrays – L18(21x37), L32(21x49),
– L9 (34). L27 (313), L81(340) L50(21x511)
• 4-level arrays – L36(211x312), L36(23x313),
– L16 (45). L64 (421) L54(21x325)
64

Analysis
• Find the main effects of the process parameters on the

response
• Conduct Analysis of Variation (ANOVA) to separate the
experimentally observed variations into a number of
specific parameter
• Based upon the ANOVA result determine which factors
and interactions are significant
65
Analysis (Cont’d)
Taguchi uses signal to noise (S/N) ratios as response variables.
Signal to Noise Ratio
• A single response which makes a tradeoff between setting the
mean to a desirable level while keeping the variance low.
• Always try to MAXIMIZE a S/N Ratio
• There are three types:
– Smaller is Better
– Target is Best
– Larger is Better
66

Signal to Noise Ratio

• A nominal value is the best:
Ao
SN t  10 log10   y j  yo  / n 
2
m- m m+ y
j 
• The smaller, the better:
Ao
SN s   10 log 10   y 2j / n  y
j 
•The larger, the better:
Ao
  1 2 
SN l  10 log10   2  / n  y
 j  y j  
67
CASE STUDY
Dvivedi A., and Kumar P., (2007), “Surface Quality Evaluation in

Ultrasonic Drilling through the Taguchi Technique," International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Publisher: Springer
London, 34, pp.131-140
68

Experimentation Methodology
Step 1: Development of Cause and Effect Diagram.

Step 2: Selection of Process Parameters.
Step 3: Decision of Range of Selected Parameters.
Step 4: Parameter Level Selection.
Step 5: Selection of an Appropriate OA.
Step 6: Conducting the Experiments and Collecting the Data.
Step 7: Analysis to Find Out Optimal Setting of Parameters.
Step 8: Determination of Range of Response at Optimal Setting.
Step 9: Confirmation Experiment.
Step 1: Cause and Effect Diagram
Workpiece Slurry Quality Characteristics:

Liquid Component MRR, TWR, Wear Ratio,
Hardness & Concentration Surface Roughness, Hole
Fracture Oversize
Thickness Pressure, Temperature & Flow rate
Material Type Abrasive type & grain
Method size
of Slurry Feed
Hole drilled by USD
process
Geometry, Size & Shape Frequency Cooling
Material
Finish & Accuracy Amplitude
Amplification
Material Type Static Load
Damping Characteristics
Mounting-Brazing Method Power Output
Configuration & Size
Tool Machine Trunk Design
Ishikawa Cause and Effect Diagram

Step 2: Selection of Process Parameters
Work piece
Grit size
Slurry concentration
Power rating
Tool material
Step 3, 4: Range & Parameter Level Selection
The range of process parameters was selected by conducting a pilot

experimentation with selected process parameters at different vales using
one factor at a time approach taking material removal rate as response
characteristic
Selected Process Parameter and Levels
Parameter
S. No. Factors Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Designation
1. Work piece A ASTM Gr. 2 ASTM Gr. 5 *
2. Grit Size B 220 320 500
3. Slurry Concentration C 25% 30% 35%
4. Power Rating D 40% 60% 80%
5. Tool E HCS HSS WC

Step 5: Selection of an appropriate OA

Before selecting a particular OA for an experiment, two items must first
be established. These are the number of parameters and interactions of
interest and the number of levels for the parameters of interest. The OA
selected must satisfy the following inequality:
Total DOF of the OA ≥ Total DOF Required for the Experiment
The most appropriate array for this study was L18 (21*37) OA with
17 DOF for experimentation.
Assignment of factors has been done using the linear graph and
triangular table. The unassigned columns are treated as error.
Step 6: Experimentation and Data Collection
Experiments were conducted on an AP-500 (240 volt) model Sonic -

Mill Ultrasound Machine, with a max. power output of 500 W.
The frequency of the machine is 20 kHz, amplitude selected is 20 μm.
Automatic feed of the tool was employed.
Silicon Carbide abrasives with #220, #320 & #500 grit sizes were used
with ordinary tap water as carrier. The abrasive slurry was pressure
fed by using a slurry pump.
The flow rate of abrasive slurry was maintained constant for all the
experiments.
Three solid tools viz. HCS, HSS, and WC were used with cylindrical
shape and diameter 5 mm.
All the experiments were conducted in random order with three
repetitions per trial.

Step 6: Experimentation and Data Collection
The responses of experiments are collected for surface roughness

The surface roughness of each hole drilled was measured by using
Optical Profiling System, NT series by Wyko. Ra values are used in
analysis. Surface roughness of walls of hole was measured and both
two and three dimensional contour plots were drawn by the system.
These plots visualize and quantify the surface roughness.
Experimental Results (Surface Roughness)

Surface Roughness Ra (μm) S/N Ratio
S. No. Average
R1 R2 R3 R 1  R 2  R 3  3  Yi (dB)
1. 1.88 2.00 1.90 1.93 -5.70

2. 2.42 2.54 2.44 2.47 -7.84
3. 2.70 2.82 2.72 2.75 -8.78
4 1.09 1.21 1.11 1.14 -1.12
5 1.80 1.92 1.82 1.85 -5.33
6 0.96 1.08 0.98 1.00 -0.04
7 1.77 1.89 1.79 1.82 -5.19
8 1.87 1.99 1.89 1.92 -5.65
9 1.88 2.00 1.90 1.93 -5.70
10 3.30 3.40 3.21 3.30 -10.38
11 1.35 1.45 1.26 1.35 -2.64
12 1.58 1.68 1.49 1.58 -4.00
13 2.10 2.20 2.01 2.10 -6.46
14 0.84 0.94 0.75 0.84 1.44
15 1.32 1.42 1.23 1.32 -2.45
16 2.03 2.13 1.94 2.03 -6.17
17 2.28 2.38 2.19 2.28 -7.18
18 1.69 1.79 1.60 1.69 -4.58

Response Curves for SR (S/N & Raw

Data)
-10.0 2.6
S/N Ratio (smaller-the-better) in dB
-8.0
2.2
Surface Roughness
-6.0
μm
1.8
-4.0
1.4
-2.0
0.0 1
HCS
HSS
ASTM Gr 2
ASTM Gr 5
CC
220
320
500
25
30
35
40
60
80
Response Curves Showing Effect of Process Parameters on Surface Roughness
S/N Ratio Surface Roughness
Step 7: Optimal Setting of Parameters
Surface Roughness
Second level of grit size (B2 ) 320
First level of slurry concentration (C1 ) 25%
First level of power Rating* (D1 ) 40%
Second level of tool* (E2 ) High speed steel
First Level of work piece* (A1) ASTM Gr. 2

Step 8, 9: Range of Response at Optimal

Setting & Confirmation Experiment
Optimal Levels Predicted Actual Value

Quality Confidence Interval
of Optimal (Ave. of 3
Characteristic (95%)
Process Parameters Value Conf. Exp.)
0.97 CIPOP: 0.765<μSR<1.175 1.11

SR B2, C1
µm CICE: 0.583<μSR<1.357
Summary
• The effect of work piece, grit size, slurry concentration, power
rating and tool as process parameters on the quality of hole
drilled by USD process were investigated and optimized.
• Titanium was chosen as work material.
• Taguchi’s L18 orthogonal array was used to design the
experiments.
• The parameters that were kept fixed during the entire
experimentation were frequency, static load and flow rate of
slurry.
• Analysis of variance was performed on raw data as well as S/N
data.
• The optimal result obtained was validated by conducting
confirmation experiments.

Limitation of the Study

Results are valid within the specified range of process parameters and the
constant parameters
Parameter
S. No. Factors Designation Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
1. Work piece A ASTM Gr. 2 ASTM Gr. 5 *
2. Grit Size B 220 320 500
3. Slurry Concentration C 25% 30% 35%
4. Power Rating D 40% 60% 80%
5. Tool E HCS HSS TC
82

Benchmarking
Instructor – Dr. Akshay Dvivedi
This material is for classroom discussion and teaching only
Benchmarking
Even if you're on the right track, you'll get run over if you just sit there. --- Will Rogers
US humorist & showman

Benchmarking
Benchmarking

Benchmarking
• Is the process of identifying, understanding, and adapting

outstanding practices from organizations anywhere in the
world to help your organizations improve its performance.
Current best practices

Benchmarking is not about aiming to close the success of
other companies or indulging in some kind of industrial
spying.
The real goal is to build on the success of others to

improve future performance. It has to be done on a
continuous basis. Searching for current best practices and
not outdated ideas…
Benchmarking process is carried out for putting corrective

actions into products, processes and systems.

Benchmarking is an Ongoing Process
• Understand your process and approach

• Compare processes, practice, and results
– Within your organization
– To world class organizations
• In your industry
• Outside your industry…
• Domestic or Foreign
Benchmarking is Not the Same as Benchmarks
Benchmarks are performance measures:

How many?
How quickly?
How high?
How low?
Benchmarking is action—discovering the specific
practices responsible for high performance,
understanding how these practices work, and adapting
and applying them to your organization…
Benchmarks are facts;
Benchmarking enables real improvement.

Benefits of Benchmarking
 Prevents reinventing the wheel (Why invest the time and
costs when someone else may have done it already--and
often better, cheaper, and faster?).
 Accelerates change and restructuring by:

 using tested and proven practices,
 convincing skeptics who can see that it works,
overcoming inertia and complacency and
creating a sense of urgency when gaps are
revealed.
 Leads to "outside the box" ideas by looking for ways to

improve outside of your industry.
 Forces organizations to examine present processes, which

often leads to improvement in and of itself…
 Makes implementation more likely because of

involvement of process owners.

• Improves Strategic Planning
• Provides Assessments of Strengths and Weaknesses
• Fosters Organizational methods and Best Practices
• Leads to significant cost savings…
• Fosters and sustains improved organizational

capabilities, quality, and process improvements
Significant Gains from Benchmarking
• Better understanding of the customers and the competitors
• Fewer complaints resulting in more satisfied customers.
• Reduction in waste, reworking and quality problems.
• Awareness of important innovations and management practices and how

they can be employed effectively
• A strong reputation within their markets.
• Increased profits, sales turnover and image…

Levels of Benchmarking
Comparisons between direct competitors (i.e. Maruti’s dealer programs

with Hyundai Motors)

Comparisons between functions inside and outside the firm...

• Internal Benchmarking
– Comparisons within the organizations
• Generic Benchmarking
– Comparisons to unrelated organizations known for product innovation
Scoping a Benchmarking Study
• Where is the greatest room for improvement?
• Where does the firm have the capability to

improve?
• Where can the firm realistically make a

change?...
• Where is the firm’s greatest percent of cost

and time?

The 5 Phases of Benchmarking Process
• Planning : Identify what to benchmark. Identify

whom to benchmark, and gather data.
• Analysis : Examine the performance gap and

project future performance.
• Integration : Communicate the findings and develop

new goals.
• Action : Take actions, monitor progress,

recalibrate measures as needed…
• Maturity : Achieve the desired state.
Phase 1: Planning
• Decide: What to benchmark.
• Identify: Whom to benchmark…
• Plan: The investigation and conduct it

Gather necessary information and data
Observe the best practices

Phase 2: Analysis
The gap is examined and the performance is

assessed against best practices.
• Determine: The current performance gap…

(Spider Diagram)
• Project : Future performance levels.
SPIDER OR RADAR DIAGRAM

M1 Total Customer Satisfaction
(Ultimate Goal)
M8 M2
Best of Best
(Benchmark)
M7 M3
M6 M4
Current Performance
M5 (Baseline)
104

Phase 3: Integration
The goal are redefined and incorporated into

the planning process.
• Communicate: Benchmarking findings and

gain acceptance…
• Revise: Performance goals
Phase 4: Action
Best practices are implemented and periodically

recalibrated as needed.
• Develop: Action plans
• Implemented: Actions and monitor progress…
• Recalibrate: The benchmarks.

Phase 5: Maturity
Leadership may be achieved
• Determine: When leadership position is

attained…
• Assess: Benchmarking as an ongoing process
Most Common Mistakes Organizations Make When Benchmarking
Mistake #1. Confusing benchmarking with participating in a survey.
A survey of organizations in a similar industry is not really

benchmarking, whatever it may be called. Such a survey will give you some
interesting numbers, but benchmarking is the process of finding out what
is behind the numbers. In other words, a benchmarking survey may tell
you where you rank, but it won't help you improve your position.

Mistake #2. Thinking there are pre-existing

"benchmarks" to be found.
Off-the-shelf benchmarks are often historic in nature and may not reflect
technological trends. Benchmarks must consistently be updated and
contextualized within their areas.
Mistake #3. Forgetting about service delivery and

customer satisfaction.
Not all production and economic parameters can be benchmarked. Some

qualities - particularly those of concern to customers of the product -
need to be considered in benchmarking also. Though not always true, a
common syndrome is that benchmarks are overemphasized to the
detriment of other issues. Many in business circumstances speak of a
"balanced scorecard," to allow monitoring of all concerns of the firm.

Mistake #4. The process is too large and complex to be

manageable.
A process is a group of tasks. A system is a group of processes.
Avoid trying to benchmark a total system - it will be extremely costly, take

ages, and be difficult to remain focused.
Better to select one or several processes that form a part of the total system,
work with it initially and then move on to the next part of the system.
Mistake #5. Confusing benchmarking with research.
Benchmarking presupposes that you are working on an existing process that

has been in operation long enough to have some data about its
effectiveness and its resource costs.
Innovation in any area should be assessed through a more formal method than
benchmarking.

Mistake #6. Misalignment.
Choosing a benchmarking topic that is not aligned with the overall strategy
and goals of the business; or worse, cuts across some other initiative
the organization is already taking.
e.g. Quality versus Production Volume
Mistake #7. Picking a topic that is too intangible and

difficult to measure.
"Employee communication" is probably the most slippery concept that

exists in an organization, but it is often cited as one of the worst
problems, so many organizations try to benchmark it.
Encourage your benchmarking team to select instead a part of the topic
that can be observed and measured; for instance, the process of
distributing memos around the organization.

Mistake #8. Not establishing the baseline.
Going out to make benchmarking visits before you have analyzed your
own process thoroughly.
Benchmarking assumes that you already know your own process and its
level of performance thoroughly. After all, that information is what
you have to offer to your benchmarking partners in exchange for the
information you are seeking from them. Make sure your
benchmarking team is very clear about what it wants to learn before
you approach potential benchmarking partners.
Mistake #9. Not researching benchmarking partners

thoroughly.
This is essential in selecting the right benchmarking partners, so you

don't waste their time or yours. There is a general rule in
benchmarking that you should not ask a question that can be
answered through other methods.

Mistake #10. Not having a code of ethics and contract

agreed with partners.
Your partners should be clear about what you are seeking to learn from
them, how that information will be treated, who will have access to it
and for what purposes it will be used. Ideally, this should be formally
agreed.
The benchmarking code of practice must be followed.
Thanks!!!


Min - 310 Taguchi 6 Sigma Benchmarking PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Min - 310 Taguchi 6 Sigma Benchmarking PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

MIN-310 Quality Management (Dvivedi- 4/13/2019

For limited Circulation)

Instructor – Dr. Akshay Dvivedi

Six Sigma is a methodology focused on creating

SIPOC Customer’s View

Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV

This material is for teaching and

Six Sigma Process

Lower Design Specification Upper Design Specification

This material is for teaching and

Six Sigma as a Metric

Axis graduated in Sigma

between + / - 2 95.45 % 45500 ppm

between + / - 3 99.73 % 2700 ppm

between + / - 4 99.9937 % 63 ppm

between + / - 5 99.9943 % 57 ppm

between + / - 6 99.99966 % 3.4 ppm

Translating capability into "rejects"

USL - LSL 6 8 10  12

at Z = -4.5, CDF = 0.0000034

This material is for teaching and

History of Six Sigma

•Six Sigma had its birth at Motorola in 1979.

•Developed by Mikel Harry.

•A quantum leap in manufacturing technology

•Within four years, Six Sigma had saved the

What is Six Sigma ?

• Measure of how well a process is performing

-6 process produces 3.4 DPMO

- Most companies are at 3-4 level

• Philosophy of reducing defects - improve customer

• Business Strategy that increases process performance

This material is for teaching and

CONCEPT OF SIX SIGMA

Six Sigma Management Approach

• “A disciplined method of using extremely

This material is for teaching and

Six Sigma Management Approach

• Six Sigma is both a philosophy and a goal

– The focus is not on DPMO but on a systematic method to

– Six Sigma projects are lead by individuals selected and

– Requires clear definition of roles and responsibilities

Six Sigma Management Approach

This material is for teaching and

Six Sigma Management Approach

Six Sigma Management Approach

• Own vision, direction, Integration, results

• Project owner • Internal team support

• Full time • Devote 50% - 100% of time to Black Belt activities

This material is for teaching and

Six Sigma Management Approach

Copyright © 2000-2009 iSixSigma LLC and Gary P. Cox

This material is for teaching and

• Data and fact driven Management

This material is for teaching and

• Drive for perfection, tolerance for failure

• AlliedSignal/Honeywell started Six Sigma

This material is for teaching and

Key 6 Tools & Methods

This material is for teaching and

This material is for teaching and

It Responds to Change By Driving Out Variation

This material is for teaching and