P. 1
Lean Office Babin Collection

Lean Office Babin Collection

|Views: 1,752|Likes:
Published by Peter Laťák

More info:

Published by: Peter Laťák on Dec 09, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less







PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 22:17:52 UTC

Lean Government United States Environmental Protection Agency Kaizen Lean manufacturing Six Sigma 1 5 18 21 33

Article Sources and Contributors Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 42 44

Article Licenses
License 45

Lean Government


Lean Government
Lean Government refers to the application of Lean production principles and methods to identify and implement the most efficient and value added way to provide government services. Government agencies have found that Lean methods enable them to better understand how their processes work, to quickly identify and implement improvements, and to build a culture of continuous improvement.[1] Numerous government agencies, ranging from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the State of Iowa, are using Lean to improve the quality, transparency, and speed of government processes. Lean government proponents generally believe that the government should cut out "waste" and "inefficiency" from government organizations, which will result in overall better services and more value for tax-supported programs and services. Proponents also generally see Lean government as a means to expand the capacity of government to provide more services per unit of investment.[2] As in the manufacturing and service sectors, some government agencies are implementing Lean methods in conjunction with Six Sigma process improvement approaches.[3] Lean government does not necessarily promote low taxes only efficient use of those taxes levied. Tax policy is discerned by the legislative and executive branches of government with oversight of the judicial branch of government. Lean government is implemented by the administrative function of government through executive order, legislative mandate, or departmental administrative decisions. Lean government can be applied in legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government.

Common Methods and Approaches
Many Lean manufacturing methods have been adapted successfully to identify non-value added activities (waste) in administrative, transactional, and office processes common in government agencies.[4] Several common Lean methods include: Value Stream Mapping (VSM) – Value stream mapping refers to the activity of developing a high‐level visual representation of a process flow involved in delivering a product or service (a “value stream”) to customers. VSM events, which are typically 3-4 days, focus on identifying sources of non‐value added activity and prioritizing future improvement activities. Kaizen – Kaizen means to change for the good of all. Kaizen activity is often focused in rapid process improvement events (kaizen events) that bring together a cross‐functional team for 3‐5 days to study a specific process and immediately implement process changes. Kaizen is based on the philosophy of continuous improvement. 5S – 5S is the name of a workplace organization method that uses a list of five Japanese words which, translated into English, start with the letter S—Sort, Set in Order, Shine, Standardize, and Sustain. As more and more government services are delivered electronically, Lean government initiatives are commonly applications of Lean IT.[5] Lean government approaches typically have the following characteristics:[6] • Take a customer service perspective that seeks to optimize value delivered to the public, the regulated community, and/or other stakeholders; • Involve employees and external stakeholders in continual improvements and problem-solving activities; • Deploy a rapid continuous improvement framework that emphasizes implementation over prolonged planning; • Seek to reduce the complexity of processes and the variation in process outputs; • Use performance metrics and visual controls to provide rapid feedback to improve real-time decision-making and problem-solving; and • Approach improvement activities using systems thinking.

Lean Government


Types of Waste
Several types of non-value added activity, or waste (muda in Japanese), are common in government administrative and service processes. Lean methods focus on identifying and eliminating these wastes. The list below identifies common administrative process wastes.[7] Administrative Process Wastes with Examples Inventory = Backlog of Work, Excess Materials or Information Defects = Data Errors, Missing Info Overproduction = Unneeded Reports, Doing Work Not Requested Complexity = Unnecessary Process Steps Waiting = Unnecessary Approval Cycles Excess Motion = Trips to Remote Printer or Files Moving Items = Report Routing, File Storage Wastes in administrative and service processes can relate to (1) collection, use, and management of information, (2) design and implementation of work processes, and (3) the efficiency and effectiveness with which individuals work.[8]

Lean Government Activity
Numerous U.S. government organizations at the federal, state, and local levels have used Lean Government methods to improve government processes, operations, and services. U.S. Federal Government Some examples of federal government organizations with active Lean Government initiatives include: • • • • • • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [9] U.S. Department of Defense [10] U.S. Army [11] U.S. Department of Agriculture [12] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development [13][14] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission [15]

U.S. State Government Some examples of state government organizations with active Lean Government initiatives include: • • • • • • • Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection [16] Connecticut Department of Labor [17] Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control [18] Iowa Office of Lean Enterprise [19] Maine Department of Labor [20] Minnesota Enterprise Lean [21] State of Ohio Lean [22]

The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), in collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, works to support and coordinate information sharing among U.S. States implementing Lean Government approaches in public environmental agencies.[23] U.S. Local Government Some examples of municipalities where lean government practices have been implemented include: • City of Cape Coral, Florida [24]

Lean Government • • • • • City of Cincinnati, Ohio[25] City of Ft. Wayne, Indiana [26] City of Grand Rapids, Michigan [27] City of Irving, Texas[28] Jacksonville, Florida [29]


The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) supports a program to assist local government organizations to improve government processes using Lean.[30]

[1] See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (March 2008) and Graham Richard (2008). [2] Ken Miller, “ The Promise of Going Lean” (http:/ / www. governing. com/ column/ promise-going-lean), ‘’Governing,’’ May 21, 2009. [3] For example, see Michael L. George, Lean Six Sigma for Service: How to Use Lean Speed & Six Sigma Quality to Improve Services and Transactions, The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2003. [4] Carlos Venegas, ‘’Flow in the Office: Implementing and Sustaining Lean Improvements,’’ Productivity Press, 2007. [5] Gilbert, Maria. “The City of Cape Coral Enables Leaner Government with AMX and JD Edwards” (http:/ / www. reuters. com/ article/ pressRelease/ idUS119892+ 06-Mar-2009+ PRN20090306) Reuters. March 6, 2009. [6] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Environmental Council of States, Working Smart for Environmental Protection: Improving State Agency Processes with Lean and Six Sigma, U.S. EPA Publication #EPA-100-R-08-007, March 2008, p. 3. <http://www.epa.gov/lean/toolkit/LeanGovtPrimer.pdf> [7] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Lean in Government Starter Kit: How to Implement Successful Lean Initiatives at Environmental Agencies, Version 2.0, U.S. EPA Publication # EPA-100-K-09-007, May 2009, p. 5. <http://www.epa.gov/lean/starterkit> [8] Carlos Venegas, Flow in the Office: Implementing and Sustaining Lean Improvements, Productivity Press, 2007, pp. 10-38. [9] http:/ / www. epa. gov/ lean/ leangovernment/ [10] http:/ / dcmo. defense. gov/ [11] http:/ / www. army. mil/ armybtkc/ focus/ cpi/ [12] http:/ / www. ocfo. usda. gov/ about/ orgchart/ finpol/ lss. htm [13] http:/ / www. hud. gov/ offices/ hsg/ mfh/ progdesc/ nursingalcp232. cfm [14] See http:/ / nreionline. com/ property/ seniorhousing/ hud-lean-program-expedites-loan-approvals/ [15] http:/ / www. nrc. gov/ reading-rm/ doc-collections/ nuregs/ brochures/ br0470/ br0470. pdf [16] http:/ / ct. gov/ dep/ cwp/ view. asp?a=2699& Q=455414& depNav_GID=1511 [17] http:/ / www. ctdol. state. ct. us/ LEAN/ [18] http:/ / www. dnrec. state. de. us/ DNREC2000/ VSM/ [19] http:/ / lean. iowa. gov/ [20] http:/ / www. maine. gov/ labor/ bendthecurve/ index. shtml [21] http:/ / www. lean. state. mn. us/ [22] http:/ / www. governor. ohio. gov/ LeanOhio. aspx [23] See http:/ / www. ecos. org/ content/ project/ detail/ 2292/ and http:/ / www. epa. gov/ lean [24] http:/ / archive. capecoral. net/ fullstory. cfm?articleid=10374 [25] Krings, David, Dave Levine, and Trent Wall, “The Use of ‘Lean’ in Local Government,” Public Management (PM) Magazine, International City/County Management Association, 88:8 (September 2006). [26] http:/ / www. cityoffortwayne. org/ index. php?option=com_content& task=view& id=1012& Itemid=1154 [27] http:/ / www. grand-rapids. mi. us/ index. pl?page_id=4330 [28] City of Irving, Texas, “City Manager’s Report: February 4, 2009,” page 4, available at: www.cityofirving.org/city-manager/pdfs/city-manager-reports/2009/CMR-020409.pdf; see also video at www.sixthsigma.com/2009/09/irving-texas-utility-uses-lean-six.htm [29] http:/ / leanjax. org/ [30] See http:/ / icma. org/ main/ bc. asp?from=search& hsid=1& bcid=1126

Lean Government


• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Environmental Council of States. ‘’Working Smart for Environmental Protection: Improving State Agency Processes with Lean and Six Sigma,’’ U.S. EPA Publication #EPA-100-R-08-007, March 2008. http://www.epa.gov/lean/toolkit/LeanGovtPrimer.pdf • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Environmental Council of States. ‘’Lean in Government Starter Kit: How to Implement Successful Lean Initiatives at Environmental Agencies, Version 2.0,’’ U.S. EPA Publication #EPA-100-K-09-007, May 2009. http://www.epa.gov/lean/starterkit • Richard, Graham. ‘’Performance is the Best Politics: How to Create High-Performance Government Using Lean Six Sigma,’’ HPG Press, 2008. • George, Michael L. ‘’Lean Six Sigma for Service: How to Use Lean Speed & Six Sigma Quality to Improve Services and Transactions,’’ The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2003. • Maleyeff, John. ‘’Improving Service Delivery in Government with Lean and Six Sigma,’’ Strategy and Transformation Series, IBM Center for the Business of Government. www.businessofgovernment.org/pdfs/MaleyeffReport.pdf • Venegas, Carlos. ‘’Flow in the Office: Implementing and Sustaining Lean Improvements,’’ Productivity Press, 2007. • Miller, Ken. ‘’We Don’t Make Widgets: Overcoming the Myths that Keep Government from Radically Improving,’’ Governing Books, January 2006.

United States Environmental Protection Agency


United States Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Protection Agency EPA

Environmental Protection Agency logo Agency overview Formed Employees Annual budget December 2, 1970 17,384 (2010)
[1] [1]

$10.486 billion (2010)

Agency executive Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator Website www.epa.gov

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or sometimes USEPA) is an agency of the federal government of the United States charged with protecting human health and the environment, by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress.[3] The EPA was proposed by President Richard Nixon and began operation on December 3, 1970, after Nixon submitted a reorganization plan to Congress and it was ratified by committee hearings in the House and Senate.[4] The agency is led by its Administrator, who is appointed by the president and approved by Congress. The current administrator is Lisa P. Jackson. The EPA is not a Cabinet department, but the administrator is normally given cabinet rank. The agency has approximately 18,000 full-time employees.[5]


United States Environmental Protection Agency


The EPA employs 17,000 people in headquarters program offices, 10 regional offices, and 27 laboratories across the country. More than half of its staff are engineers, scientists, and environmental protection specialists; other groups include legal, public affairs, financial, and computer specialists. The agency conducts environmental assessment, research, and education. It has the primary responsibility for setting and enforcing national standards under a variety of environmental laws, in consultation with state, tribal, and local EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C. governments. It delegates some permitting, monitoring, and enforcement responsibility to U.S. states and Native American tribes. EPA enforcement powers include fines, sanctions, and other measures. The agency also works with industries and all levels of government in a wide variety of voluntary pollution prevention programs and energy conservation efforts.

On July 9, 1970, citing rising concerns over environmental protection and conservation, President Richard Nixon transmitted Reorganization Plan No. 3 to the United States Congress by executive order, creating the EPA as a single, independent agency from a number of smaller arms of different federal agencies. Prior to the establishment of the EPA, the federal government was not structured to comprehensively regulate environmental pollutants.

EPA offices
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • Office of Administration and Resources Office of Air and Radiation Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Office of Environmental Information Office of Environmental Justice Office of the Chief Financial Officer Office of General Counsel Office of Inspector General Office of International Affairs Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances Office of Research and Development [6] Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Office of Water Office of Chemical Safety & Pollution Prevention

Each EPA regional office is responsible within its states for implementing the Agency's programs, except those programs that have been specifically delegated to states.

United States Environmental Protection Agency


• Region 1 - responsible within the states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. • Region 2 - responsible within the states of New Jersey and New York. It is also responsible for the US territories of Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. • Region 3 - responsible within the states of Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

The administrative regions of the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

• Region 4 - responsible within the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. • Region 5 - responsible within the states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. • • • • Region 6 - responsible within the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. Region 7 - responsible within the states of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Region 8 - responsible within the states of Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. Region 9 - responsible within the states of Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, and the territories of Guam and American Samoa. • Region 10 - responsible within the states of Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Each regional office also implements programs on Indian Tribal lands, except those programs delegated to Tribal authorities.

Related legislation
The legislation here is general environmental protection legislation, and may also apply to other units of the government, including the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture.

• • • • • • • • • • 1955 - Air Pollution Control Act PL 84-159 1963 - Clean Air Act PL 88-206 1965 - Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act PL 89-272 1966 - Clean Air Act Amendments PL 89-675 1967 - Air Quality Act PL 90-148 1969 - National Environmental Policy Act PL 91-190 1970 - Clean Air Act Extension PL 91-604 1976 - Toxic Substances Control Act PL 94-469 1977 - Clean Air Act Amendments PL 95-95 1990 - Clean Air Act Amendments PL 101-549

United States Environmental Protection Agency


• • • • • • • • • • • 1948 - Water Pollution Control Act PL 80-845 1965 - Water Quality Act PL 89-234 1966 - Clean Waters Restoration Act PL 89-753 1969 - National Environmental Policy Act PL 91-190 1970 - Water Quality Improvement Act PL 91-224 1972 - Federal Water Pollution Control Amendments of 1972 PL 92-500 1974 - Safe Drinking Water Act PL 93-523 1976 - Toxic Substances Control Act PL 94-469 1977 - Clean Water Act PL 95-217 1987 - Water Quality Act PL 100-4 1996 - Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 PL 104-182

• 1947 - Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act • 1964 - Wilderness Act PL 88-577 • 1968 - Scenic Rivers Preservation Act PL 90-542 • • • • • • • • 1969 - National Environmental Policy Act PL 91-190 1970 - Wilderness Act PL 91-504 1977 - Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act PL 95-87 1978 - Wilderness Act PL 98-625 1980 - Alaska Land Protection Act PL 96-487 1994 - California Desert Protection Act PL 103-433 1996 - Food Quality Protection Act [7] 2010 - California Desert Protection Act

Endangered species
• • • • • 1946 - Coordination Act PL 79-732 1966 - Endangered Species Preservation Act PL 89-669 1969 - Endangered Species Conservation Act PL 91-135 1972 - Marine Mammal Protection Act PL 92-522 1973 - Endangered Species Act PL 93-205

Hazardous waste
• • • • • • • • • 1965 - Solid Waste Disposal Act PL 89-272 1969 - National Environmental Policy Act PL 91-190 1970 - Resource Recovery Act PL 91-512 1976 - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act PL 94-580 1980 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("Superfund") PL 96-510 1982 - Nuclear Waste Repository Act PL 97-425 1984 - Hazardous and Solid Wastes Amendments Act PL 98-616 1986 - Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act PL 99-499 2002 - Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act ("Brownfields Law") PL 107-118

United States Environmental Protection Agency


Energy Star
In 1992 the EPA launched the Energy Star program, a voluntary program that fosters energy efficiency.

EPA administers the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (which is much older than the agency) and registers all pesticides legally sold in the United States.

Environmental Impact Statement Review
EPA is responsible for reviewing projects of other federal agencies' Environmental Impact Statements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Safer Detergents Stewardship Initiative
Through the Safer Detergents Stewardship Initiative (SDSI),[8] EPA's Design for the Environment (DfE) recognizes environmental leaders who voluntarily commit to the use of safer surfactants. Safer surfactants are surfactants that break down quickly to non-polluting compounds and help protect aquatic life in both fresh and salt water. Nonylphenol ethoxylates, commonly referred to as NPEs, are an example of a surfactant class that does not meet the definition of a safer surfactant. The Design for the Environment has identified safer alternative surfactants through partnerships with industry and environmental advocates. These safer alternatives are comparable in cost and are readily available. CleanGredients[9] is a source of safer surfactants.

Fuel economy
Manufacturers selling automobiles in the USA are required to provide EPA fuel economy test results for their vehicles and the manufacturers are not allowed to provide results from alternate sources. The fuel economy is calculated using the emissions data collected during two of the vehicle's Clean Air Act certification tests by measuring the total volume of carbon captured from the exhaust during the tests. The current testing system was originally developed in 1972 and used driving cycles designed to simulate driving during rush-hour in Los Angeles during that era. Prior to 1984 the EPA reported the exact fuel economy figures calculated from the test. In 1984, the EPA began adjusting city (aka Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule or UDDS) results downward by 10% and highway (aka HighWay Fuel Economy Test or HWFET) results by 22% to compensate for changes in driving conditions since 1972 and to better correlate the EPA test results with real-world driving. In 1996, the EPA proposed updating the Federal Testing Procedures[10] to add a new higher speed test (US06) and an air-conditioner on test (SC03) to further improve the correlation of fuel economy and emission estimates with real-world reports. The updated testing methodology was finalized in December, 2006 for implementation with model year 2008 vehicles and set the precedent of a 12 year review cycle for the test procedures.[11] In February 2005, the organization launched a program called "Your MPG [12]" that allows drivers to add real-world fuel economy statistics into a database on the EPA's fuel economy website and compare them with others and the original EPA test results. It is important to note that the EPA actually conducts these tests on very few vehicles. "While the public mistakenly presumes that this federal agency is hard at work conducting complicated tests on every new model of truck, van, car, and SUV, in reality, just 18 of the EPA’s 17,000 employees work in the automobile-testing department in Ann Arbor, Michigan, examining 200 to 250 vehicles a year, or roughly 15 percent of new models. As to that other 85

United States Environmental Protection Agency percent, the EPA takes automakers at their word —- without any testing -— accepting submitted results as accurate." [13] Two-thirds of the vehicles the EPA tests themselves are selected randomly, and the remaining third are tested for specific reasons. Though it was originally created as a reference point for fossil fuelled vehicles, it can also be used to be able to give estimates on how many miles an electric vehicle will do on a single charge.[14]


Air quality
The Air Quality Modeling Group (AQMG) is in the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and provides leadership and direction on the full range of air quality models, air pollution dispersion models[15] [16] and other mathematical simulation techniques used in assessing pollution control strategies and the impacts of air pollution sources. The AQMG serves as the focal point on air pollution modeling techniques for other EPA headquarters staff, EPA regional Offices, and State and local environmental agencies. It coordinates with the EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) on the development of new models and techniques, as well as wider issues of atmospheric research. Finally, the AQMG conducts modeling analyses to support the policy and regulatory decisions of the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS). The AQMG is located in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Oil pollution
SPCC - Spill Prevention Containment and Counter Measures. Secondary Containment mandated at oil storage facilities. Oil release containment at oil development sites.

The WaterSense program is designed to encourage water efficiency through the use of a special label on consumer products. Products include high-efficiency toilets (HETs), bathroom sink faucets (and accessories), and irrigation equipment. WaterSense is a voluntary program, with EPA developing specifications for water-efficient products through a public process and product testing by independent laboratories. The program was launched in 2006.[17]

Drinking water
EPA ensures safe drinking water for the public, by setting standards for more than 160,000 public water systems throughout the United States. EPA oversees states, local governments and water suppliers to enforce the standards, under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The program includes regulation of injection wells in order to protect underground sources of drinking water.

Research vessel
On March 3, 2004 the United States Navy transferred USNS Bold, a Stalwart class ocean surveillance ship, to the EPA, now known as OSV Bold. The ship previously used in anti-submarine operations during the Cold War, is equipped with sidescan sonar, underwater video, water and sediment sampling instruments, used in study of ocean and coastline. One of the major missions of Bold is to monitor sites where materials are dumped from dredging operations in U.S. ports for ecological impact.[18]
OSV Bold docked at Port Canaveral, FL

United States Environmental Protection Agency


Advance identification
Advance identification, or ADID, is a planning process used by the EPA to identify wetlands and other bodies of water and their respective suitability for the discharge of dredged and fill material. The EPA conducts the process in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and local states or Native American Tribes. As of February 1993, 38 ADID projects had been completed and 33 were ongoing.[19]

Air quality standards review
Since its inception the EPA has begun to rely less and less on its scientists and more on nonscience personnel. EPA has recently changed their policies regarding limits for ground-level ozone, particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and lead. New policies will minimize scientist interaction with the agency and rely more on policy makers who have minimal scientific knowledge. This new policy has been criticized by Democrats.[20] On March 12, 2008, the Federal government of the United States reported that the air in hundreds of U.S. counties was simply too dirty to breathe, ordering a multibillion-dollar expansion of efforts to clean up smog in cities and towns nationwide.[21]

Fuel economy
In July 2005, an EPA report showing that auto companies were using loopholes to produce less fuel-efficient cars was delayed. The report was supposed to be released the day before a controversial energy bill was passed and would have provided backup for those opposed to it, but at the last minute the EPA delayed its release.[22] The state of California sued the EPA for its refusal to allow California and 16 other states to raise fuel economy standards for new cars.[23] EPA administrator Stephen L. Johnson claimed that the EPA was working on its own standards, but the move has been widely considered an attempt to shield the auto industry from environmental regulation by setting lower standards at the federal level, which would then preempt state laws.[24] [25] [26] California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with governors from 13 other states, stated that the EPA's actions ignored federal law, and that existing California standards (adopted by many states in addition to California) were almost twice as effective as the proposed federal standards.[27] It was reported that Stephen Johnson ignored his own staff in making this decision.[28] After the federal government bought out General Motors and Chrysler in the Automotive industry crisis of 2008–2010, the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox was released with EPA a fuel economy rating abnormally higher than its competitors. Independent road tests [29] [30] [31] [32] found that both vehicle did not out-perform its competitors, which had much lower fuel economy ratings. Later road tests [33] [34] found better, but inconclusive, results.

Global warming
In June 2005, a memo revealed that Philip Cooney, former chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, and former lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute, had personally edited documents, summarizing government research on climate change, before their release.[35] Cooney resigned two days after the memo was published in The New York Times. Cooney said he had been planning to resign for over two years, implying the timing of his resignation was just a coincidence. Specifically, he said he had planned to resign to "spend time with his family."[36] One week after resigning he took a job at Exxon Mobil in their public affairs department.

In December 2007, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson approved a draft of a document that declared that climate change imperiled the public welfare - a decision that would trigger the first national mandatory global-warming regulations. Associate Deputy Administrator Jason Burnett e-mailed the draft to the White House. White House

United States Environmental Protection Agency aides - who had long resisted mandatory regulations as a way to address climate change - knew the gist of what Johnson's finding would be, Burnett said. They also knew that once they opened the attachment, it would become a public record, making it controversial and difficult to rescind. So they didn't open it; rather, they called Johnson and asked him to take back the draft. U.S. law clearly stated that the final decision was the EPA administrator's, not President Bush's. Johnson rescinded the draft; in July 2008, he issued a new version which did not state that global warming was danger to public welfare. Burnett resigned in protest.[38]


Greenhouse gas emissions
The Supreme Court ruled on April 2, 2007 in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency that the EPA has the authority to regulate the emission of greenhouse gases in automobile emissions, stating that "greenhouse gases fit well within the Clean Air Act capacious definition of air pollutant." The court also stated that the EPA must regulate in this area unless it is able to provide a scientific reason for not doing so.[39] Jason K. Burnett, former EPA deputy associate administrator, told the United States Congress that an official from Vice President Dick Cheney's office censored congressional testimony by Julie L. Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.[40] Reportedly, the testimony excluded said that "CDC considers climate change a serious public health concern."[40] On December 7, 2009, the Agency responded to the Supreme Court's 2007 ruling by releasing its final findings on greenhouse gases, declaring that "greenhouse gases (GHGs) threaten the public health and welfare of the American people". The finding applied to the "six key well-mixed greenhouse gases": carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.[41] [42]

In 2004, the Agency began a strategic planning exercise to develop plans for a more virtual approach to library services. The effort was curtailed in July 2005 when the Agency proposed a $2.5 million cut in its 2007 budget for libraries. Based on the proposed 2007 budget, the EPA posted a notice to the Federal Register, September 20, 2006 that EPA Headquarters Library would close its doors to walk-in patrons and visitors on October 1, 2006.[43] The EPA also closed some of its regional libraries and reduced hours in others,[44] using the same FY 2007 proposed budget numbers. On October 1, 2008, the Agency re-opened regional libraries in Chicago, Dallas and Kansas City and the library at its Headquarters in Washington, DC.[45]

Mercury emissions
In March 2005, nine states (California, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, New Mexico and Vermont) sued the EPA. The EPA's inspector general had determined that the EPA's regulation of mercury emissions did not follow the Clean Air Act, and that the regulations were influenced by top political appointees.[46] [47] The EPA had suppressed a study it commissioned by Harvard University which contradicted its position on mercury controls.[48] The suit alleges that the EPA's rule allowing exemption from "maximum available control technology" was illegal, and additionally charged that the EPA's system of pollution credit trading allows power plants to forego reducing mercury emissions.[49] Several states also began to enact their own mercury emission regulations. Illinois' proposed rule would have reduced mercury emissions from power plants by an average of 90% by 2009.[50]

United States Environmental Protection Agency


9/11 air ratings
A report released by the Office of the Inspector General of the United States Environmental Protection Agency in August 2003 claimed that the White House put pressure on the EPA to delete cautionary information about the air quality in New York City around Ground Zero following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Very fine airborne particulates
Tiny particles, under 2.5 micrometres, are attributed to health and mortality concerns,[51] so some health advocates want the EPA to regulate it. The science may be in its infancy, although many conferences have discussed the trails of this airborne matter in the air. Foreign governments such as Australia [52] and most EU states have addressed this issue. The EPA first established standards in 1997, and strengthened them in 2006. As with other standards, regulation and enforcement of the PM2.5 standards is the responsibility of the state governments, through State Implementation Plans.[53]

Political pressure
In April 2008, the Union of Concerned Scientists said that more than An Environmental Protection Agency employee half of the nearly 1,600 EPA staff scientists who responded online to a checks one of the many air sampling locations set up around the World Trade Center site. detailed questionnaire reported they had experienced incidents of political interference in their work. The survey included chemists, toxicologists, engineers, geologists and experts in other fields of science. About 40% of the scientists reported that the interference has been more prevalent in the last five years compared to previous years. The highest number of complaints came from scientists who are involved in determining the risks of cancer by chemicals used in food and other aspects of everyday life.[54]

Environmental justice
The EPA has been criticized for its lack of progress towards environmental justice. Administrator Christine Todd Whitman was criticized for her changes to President Bill Clinton's Executive Order 12898 during 2001, removing the requirements for government agencies to take the poor and minority populations into special consideration when making changes to environmental legislation, and therefore defeating the spirit of the Executive Order.[55] In a March 2004 report, the inspector general of the agency concluded that the EPA "has not developed a clear vision or a comprehensive strategic plan, and has not established values, goals, expectations, and performance measurements" for environmental justice in its daily operations. Another report in September 2006 found the agency still had failed to review the success of its programs, policies and activities towards environmental justice.[56] Studies have also found that poor and minority populations were underserved by the EPA's Superfund program, and that this equity was worsening.[55]

United States Environmental Protection Agency


Barriers to enforcing environmental justice
Localization Many issues of environmental justice are localized, and are therefore hard to be addressed by federal agencies such as the EPA. Without significant media attention, political interest, or ‘crisis’ status, local issues are less likely to be addressed on local or federal level. With a still developing sector of environmental justice under the EPA, small, local incidents are unlikely to be solved compared to larger, well publicized incidents. Conflicting political powers The White House maintains direct control over the EPA, and its enforcements are subject to the political agenda of who is in power. Republicans and Democrats differ in their approaches to, and perceived concerns of, environmental justice. While President Bill Clinton signed the executive order 12898, the Bush administration did not develop a clear plan or establish goals for integrating environmental justice into everyday practices, which in turn affected the motivation for environmental enforcement.[57] Responsibilities of the EPA The EPA is responsible for preventing and detecting environmental crimes, informing the public of environmental enforcement, and setting and monitoring standards of air pollution, water pollution, hazardous wastes and chemicals. While the EPA aids in preventing and identifying hazardous situations, it is hard to construct a specific mission statement given its wide range of responsibilities.[58] It is impossible to address every environmental crime adequately or efficiently if there is no specific mission statement to refer to. The EPA answers to various groups, competes for resources, and confronts a wide array of harms to the environment. All of these present challenges, including a lack of resources, its self-policing policy, and a broadly defined legislation that creates too much discretion for EPA officers.[59] Authority of the EPA Under different circumstances, the EPA faces many limitations to enforcing environmental justice. It does not have the authority or resources to address injustices without an increase in federal mandates requiring private industries to consider the environmental ramifications of their activities.[60]

List of EPA administrators
No. 1 Administrator William D. Ruckelshaus Picture Start of term 1971 End of term 1973 President(s) Richard Nixon


Russell E. Train



Richard Nixon Gerald Ford


Douglas M. Costle



Jimmy Carter


Anne M. Gorsuch (Burford)



Ronald Reagan


William D. Ruckelshaus



Ronald Reagan

United States Environmental Protection Agency

1985 1989 Ronald Reagan


Lee M. Thomas


William K. Reilly



George H. W. Bush


Carol M. Browner



Bill Clinton


Christine Todd Whitman



George W. Bush


Michael O. Leavitt



George W. Bush


Stephen L. Johnson



George W. Bush


Lisa P. Jackson



Barack Obama

[1] [2] [3] [4]

2010 EPA Budget p. 5 (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ budget/ 2010/ 2010bib. pdf) http:/ / www. epa. gov "Our Mission and What We Do" (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ aboutepa/ whatwedo. html). US EPA. . Retrieved 8 December 2010. "Public Access – When and how was the EPA Created?" (http:/ / publicaccess. custhelp. com/ cgi-bin/ publicaccess. cfg/ php/ enduser/ std_adp. php?p_faqid=217& p_created=1087594315& p_sid=F8oPcg6j& p_accessibility=0& p_redirect=& p_lva=& p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX3NvcnRfYnk9JnBfZ3JpZHNvcnQ9JnBfcm93X2NudD0xOTYsMTk2JnBfcHJvZHM9JnBfY2F0cz0mcF9wdj0mcF9jdj0mcF9zZWFyY2 p_li=& p_topview=1). U.S. EPA. . Retrieved 2008-06-14.

[5] Joseph Kahn and Jim Yardley (August 26, 2007). "As China Roars, Pollution Reaches Deadly Extremes" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2007/ 08/ 26/ world/ asia/ 26china. html). New York Times. . Also see U.S. Census Bureau spreadsheet (http:/ / www. census. gov/ compendia/ statab/ tables/ 07s0483. xls) [6] http:/ / epa. gov/ research/ [7] http:/ / www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ regulating/ laws. htm [8] EPA SDSI Home Page (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ dfe/ pubs/ projects/ formulat/ sdsi. htm) [9] CleanGredients Home Page (http:/ / www. cleangredients. org) [10] "Federal Test Procedure Revisions" (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ OMS/ sftp. htm). 1996-10-22. . Retrieved 2009-10-03. [11] EPA Fuel Economy (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ fueleconomy/ 420f06069. htm) [12] http:/ / www. fueleconomy. gov/ mpg/ MPG. do [13] "The Truth About EPA City / Highway MPG Estimates" (http:/ / www. caranddriver. com/ features/ 09q3/ the_truth_about_epa_city_highway_mpg_estimates-feature). 2009-08. . Retrieved 2010-08-19. [14] http:/ / www. wired. com/ autopia/ 2010/ 11/ honda-finds-evs-a-perfect-fit [15] Turner, D.B. (1994). Workbook of atmospheric dispersion estimates: an introduction to dispersion modeling (2nd ed.). CRC Press. ISBN 1-56670-023-X. www.crcpress.com (http:/ / www. crcpress. com/ shopping_cart/ products/ product_detail. asp?sku=L1023& parent_id=& pc=)

United States Environmental Protection Agency
[16] Beychok, M.R. (2005). Fundamentals Of Stack Gas Dispersion (4th ed.). author-published. ISBN 0-9644588-0-2. Air-dispersion.com (http:/ / www. air-dispersion. com) [17] EPA. "WaterSense." (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ watersense/ news/ archive/ 2006. htm) [18] "About the OSV Bold" (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ owow/ osvbold/ brochure. html). EPA. pp. EPA 842-F-05-004. . Retrieved 2009-01-17. [19] EPA > Wetlands > Wetlands Fact Sheet (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ OWOW/ wetlands/ facts/ fact28. html) [20] C&E News, December 18, 2006 (http:/ / pubs. acs. org/ isubscribe/ journals/ cen/ 84/ i51/ html/ 8451air. html), page 15 [21] CNN, March 13, 2008 (http:/ / edition. cnn. com/ 2008/ HEALTH/ 03/ 12/ dirty. air. ap/ index. html) [22] Danny Hakim (July 28, 2005). "E.P.A. Holds Back Report on Car Fuel Efficiency" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2005/ 07/ 28/ business/ 28fuel. html). New York Times. . [23] Blog.Wired.com (http:/ / blog. wired. com/ wiredscience/ 2007/ 10/ governor-arnie-. html) [24] "EPA Denies California Waiver" (http:/ / abclocal. go. com/ kfsn/ story?section=news/ state& id=5980352). ABC. February 29, 2008. . [25] Simon, Richard; Wilson, Janet (2007-12-20). "EPA denies California's right to mandate emissions" (http:/ / www. latimes. com/ news/ local/ la-me-epa20dec20,0,1603760. story?coll=la-home-center). latimes.com. . Retrieved 2009-11-21. [26] "Absurdity at the EPA: Denying California emissions plan a new low | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Opinion: Editorials" (http:/ / www. dallasnews. com/ sharedcontent/ dws/ dn/ opinion/ editorials/ stories/ DN-EPA_30edi. ART. State. Edition1. 36bb1ef. html). Dallasnews.com. 2008-01-01. . Retrieved 2009-11-21. [27] "Text of Letter from Gov. Schwarzenegger and 13 other Governors Regarding U.S. EPA’s Denial of California’s Tailpipe Emissions Waiver Request" (http:/ / gov. ca. gov/ press-release/ 8596/ ). Gov.ca.gov. . Retrieved 2009-11-21. [28] Wilson, Janet (2007-12-21). "EPA chief is said to have ignored staff" (http:/ / www. latimes. com/ news/ printedition/ california/ la-me-epa21dec21,0,7077099,full. story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california). latimes.com. . Retrieved 2009-11-21. [29] "2010 Chevrolet Equinox LT2 Full Test and Video" (http:/ / www. insideline. com/ chevrolet/ equinox/ 2010/ 2010-chevrolet-equinox-lt2-full-test-and-video. html). Edmunds InsideLine. 2009-09-29. . Retrieved 2010-02-17. [30] Jared Gall (August 2009). "2010 Chevrolet Equinox LT - Short Take Road Test" (http:/ / www. caranddriver. com/ reviews/ car/ 09q3/ 2010_chevrolet_equinox_lt-short_take_road_test). Car and Driver. . Retrieved 2010-02-17. [31] John Voelcker (2009-10-27). "Drive Report: 26mpg in 2010 Chevrolet Equinox Four-Cylinder" (http:/ / www. greencarreports. com/ blog/ 1037186_drive-report-26-mpg-in-2010-chevrolet-equinox-four-cylinder). GreenCarReports.com. . Retrieved 2010-02-17. [32] Why the Chevy Equinox EPA Mileage Numbers Don't Add Up (http:/ / www. thetruthaboutcars. com/ why-the-chevy-equinox-epa-mileage-numbers-dont-add-up/ ) [33] "2010 Chevrolet Equinox vs. 2011 Kia Sorento, Program #2939" (http:/ / www. mpt. org/ motorweek/ reviews/ rt2939a. shtml). Motorweek. 2010-05-28. . Retrieved 2010-07-06. [34] "REVIEW: 2010 CHEVROLET EQUINOX LT FWD" (http:/ / www. leftlanenews. com/ chevrolet-equinox-review. html). . [35] U.S. Official Edited Warming, Emission Link - Report (http:/ / www. cslproductions. com/ scrapbook/ NYtimes-bush-global-warming-editor-6-9-05/ ), Reuters, June 8, 2005 [36] White House Official Resigns After Climate Documents Flap (http:/ / www. commondreams. org/ headlines05/ 0612-04. htm), Agence France Presse, June 12, 2005 [37] Ex-White House environment official joins Exxon (http:/ / www. political-news. org/ breaking/ 11978/ ex-white-house-environment-official-joins-exxon. html), Reuters, June 15, 2005 [38] John Shiffman and John Sullivan (December 7, 2008). "An Eroding Mission at EPA; The Bush administration has weakened the agency charged with safeguarding health and the environment" (http:/ / www. philly. com/ inquirer/ front_page/ 20081207_An_Eroding_Mission_at_EPA. html?viewAll=y). Philadephia Inquirer. . [39] Linda Greenhouse (April 2, 2007). "Justices Say E.P.A. Has Power to Act on Harmful Gases" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2007/ 04/ 03/ washington/ 03scotus. html). New York Times. . [40] Juliet Eilperin (July 9, 2008). "Cheney's Staff Cut Testimony On Warming" (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2008/ 07/ 08/ AR2008070801442. html?referrer=delicious). Washington Post. . [41] United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009-12-07). "EPA: Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health and the Environment / Science overwhelmingly shows greenhouse gas concentrations at unprecedented levels due to human activity" (http:/ / yosemite. epa. gov/ opa/ admpress. nsf/ d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/ 08d11a451131bca585257685005bf252!OpenDocument). Press release. . Retrieved 2009-12-10. [42] "Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act" (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ climatechange/ endangerment. html). Climate Change - Regulatory Initiatives. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009-12-07. . Retrieved 2009-12-10. [43] "Notification of Closure of the EPA Headquarters Library" (pdf) (http:/ / a257. g. akamaitech. net/ 7/ 257/ 2422/ 01jan20061800/ edocket. access. gpo. gov/ 2006/ 06-7803. htm), September 20, 2006 [44] Letter to Appropriations Committee, Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee, June 29, 2006 (pdf) (http:/ / www. peer. org/ docs/ epa/ 06_29_6_union_library_ltr. pdf), from leaders of 16 local EPA unions [45] EPA Newsbrief, October 1, 2008 (http:/ / yosemite. epa. gov/ opa/ admpress. nsf/ 4a3d7e51caf96c7a85257359003f533e/ 9665e31d9c19a212852574d500537a10!OpenDocument). Retrieved January 17, 2009. [46] Proposed Mercury Rules Bear Industry Mark (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ ac2/ wp-dyn?pagename=article& contentId=A64630-2004Jan30), Washington Post, January 31, 2004


United States Environmental Protection Agency
[47] EPA Inspector Finds Mercury Proposal Tainted (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A61762-2005Feb3. html), Washington Post, February 4, 2005 [48] New EPA Mercury Rule Omits Conflicting Data (http:/ / www. washingtonpost. com/ wp-dyn/ articles/ A55268-2005Mar21. html), Washington Post, March 22, 2005 [49] States Sue EPA Over Mercury Emissions (http:/ / www. waterconserve. info/ articles/ reader. asp?linkid=40416), LA Times, March 30, 2005 [50] Governor Blagojevich and Illinois EPA Propose Aggressive Mercury Controls For Illinois Power Plants (http:/ / www. epa. state. il. us/ environmental-progress/ v32/ n1/ environmental-progress. pdf), Environmental Progress, Spring 2006, page 12 [51] Reasons Why Particulate Matter (PM) Should be Included in EPA Settlements with Electric Utility Companies (http:/ / www. icac. com/ files/ public/ PMreasons. pdf) [52] http:/ / www. epa. qld. gov. au/ environmental_management/ air/ air_quality_monitoring/ air_pollutants/ airborne_particulates/ [53] PM Standards Revision - 2006 | Particulate Matter | Air & Radiation | US EPA (http:/ / www. epa. gov/ oar/ particlepollution/ naaqsrev2006. html) [54] "Meddling at EPA? Activists point to survey; Two thirds of 1,586 EPA scientists polled cite interference, UCS reports" (http:/ / www. msnbc. msn. com/ id/ 24276709/ ). Associated Press. April 23, 2008. . [55] O’Neil, S. G. (2007). Superfund: Evaluating the Impact of Executive Order 12898 (http:/ / www. ehponline. org/ members/ 2007/ 9903/ 9903. pdf). Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 115, Number 7, pgs 1087–1093 [56] Bullard, Robert (2007-07-25). "Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Regarding Environmental Justice". [57] Bullard, Robert. Growing Smarter: Achieving Livable Communities, Environmental Justice, and Regional Equity. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2007 [58] Rosenbaum, W. A. “Still reforming after all these years: George W. Bush’s new era’ at the EPA. Environmental Policy: New directions for the Twenty-first century. Washington DC: CQ Press, 2003 [59] Burns, Ronald G. Michael J. Lynch, and Paul Stretesky. Environmental Law, Crime, and Justice. New York: LFB Scholarly publishing Inc, 2008 [60] Environmental Justice Coalition (EJC). “Environmental Justice act of 2009.” Environmental Justice Coalition, 2008. EJ Coalition Online: Ejcoalition.Multiply.com (http:/ / ejcoalition. multiply. com/ journal/ item/ 51/ Environmental_Justice_Act_of_2009)


External links
• DotGovWatch.com (http://www.dotgovwatch.com/wsdl/map.php), created using EPA's Toxic Release Inventory Map • FuelEconomy.gov (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/) • CLU-IN.org (http://www.clu-in.org), Haz Waste Site Cleanup Information by US EPA Technology Innovation Program • Sanjour.info (http://sanjour.info), Collected Papers of William Sanjour a retired EPA employee and whistleblower • BreakingLegalNews.com (http://www.breakinglegalnews.com/entry/ High-Court-Rule-Against-White-House-on-Emissions), High Court Rules Against White House on Emissions Breaking Legal News, April 2, 2007 • ASCIcorp.com (http://www.ascicorp.com), the ASci Corporation • Selected Digitized Environmental Protection Agency Records (http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/topics/ environment/index.html) Available in the National Archives' Archival Research Catalog (http://www.archives. gov/research/arc/) • OpenRegs.com (http://openregs.com/agencies/view/4/environmental_protection_agency), Proposed and finalized federal regulations from the United States Environmental Protection Agency • NTEU Chapter 280 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Headquarters Office in Washington D.C (http://nteu280.org/)



Kaizen (改善), Japanese for "improvement" or "change for the better", refers to philosophy or practices that focus upon continuous improvement of processes in manufacturing, engineering, supporting business processes, and management. It has been applied in healthcare,[1] psychotherapy,[2] life-coaching, government, banking, and many other industries. When used in the business sense and applied to the workplace, kaizen refers to activities that continually improve all functions, and involves all employees from the CEO to the assembly line workers. It also applies to processes, such as purchasing and logistics, that cross organizational boundaries into the supply chain.[3] By improving standardized activities and processes, kaizen aims to eliminate waste (see lean manufacturing). Kaizen was first implemented in several Japanese businesses after the Second World War, influenced in part by American business and quality management teachers who visited the country. It has since spread throughout the world[4] and is now being implemented in many other venues besides just business and productivity.

Kaizen is a daily process, the purpose of which goes beyond simple productivity improvement. It is also a process that, when done correctly, humanizes the workplace, eliminates overly hard work ("muri"), and teaches people how to perform experiments on their work using the scientific method and how to learn to spot and eliminate waste in business processes. In all, the process suggests a humanized approach to workers and to increasing productivity: "The idea is to nurture the company's human resources as much as it is to praise and encourage participation in kaizen activities."[5] Successful implementation requires "the participation of workers in the improvement."[6] People at all levels of an organization participate in kaizen, from the CEO down to janitorial staff, as well as external stakeholders when applicable. The format for kaizen can be individual, suggestion system, small group, or large group. At Toyota, it is usually a local improvement within a workstation or local area and involves a small group in improving their own work environment and productivity. This group is often guided through the kaizen process by a line supervisor; sometimes this is the line supervisor's key role. Kaizen on a broad, cross-departmental scale in companies, generates total quality management, and frees human efforts through improving productivity using machines and computing power. While kaizen (at Toyota) usually delivers small improvements, the culture of continual aligned small improvements and standardization yields large results in the form of compound productivity improvement. This philosophy differs from the "command and control" improvement programs of the mid-twentieth century. Kaizen methodology includes making changes and monitoring results, then adjusting. Large-scale pre-planning and extensive project scheduling are replaced by smaller experiments, which can be rapidly adapted as new improvements are suggested. In modern usage, a focused kaizen that is designed to address a particular issue over the course of a week is referred to as a "kaizen blitz" or "kaizen event". These are limited in scope, and issues that arise from them are typically used in later blitzes.

After World War II, to help restore Japan, American occupation forces brought in American experts to help with the rebuilding of Japanese industry. The Civil Communications Section (CCS) developed a Management Training Program that taught statistical control methods as part of the overall material. This course was developed and taught by Homer Sarasohn and Charles Protzman in 1949 and 1950. Sarasohn recommended William Deming for further training in Statistical Methods. The Economic and Scientific Section (ESS) group was also tasked with improving Japanese management skills and Edgar McVoy is instrumental in bringing Lowell Mellen to Japan to properly install the Training Within Industry (TWI) programs in 1951. Prior to the arrival of Mellen in 1951, the ESS group had a training film done to introduce the three TWI "J" programs (Job Instruction, Job Methods and Job Relations)- the

Kaizen film was titled "Improvement in 4 Steps" (Kaizen eno Yon Dankai). This is the original introduction of "Kaizen" to Japan. For the pioneering, introducing, and implementing Kaizen in Japan, the Emperor of Japan awarded the Second Order Medal of the Sacred Treasure to Dr. Deming in 1960. Consequently, the Union of Japanese Science and Engineering (JUSE) instituted the annual Deming Prizes for achievements in quality and dependability of products in Japan. On October 18, 1989, JUSE awarded the Deming Prize to Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), based in the United States, for its exceptional accomplishments in its process and quality control management. FPL was "the first company outside of Japan to win the Deming Prize." Reference: US National Archives - SCAP collection - PR NewsWire


The Toyota Production System is known for kaizen, where all line personnel are expected to stop their moving production line in case of any abnormality and, along with their supervisor, suggest an improvement to resolve the abnormality which may initiate a kaizen. The cycle of kaizen activity can be defined as: • Standardize an operation • Measure the standardized operation (find cycle time and amount of in-process inventory) • Gauge measurements against requirements • Innovate to meet requirements and increase productivity • Standardize the new, improved operations • Continue cycle ad infinitum This is also known as the Shewhart cycle, Deming cycle, or PDCA. Masaaki Imai made the term famous in his book Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. Apart from business applications of the method, both Anthony Robbins and Robert Maurer, PhD[7] have popularized the kaizen principles into personal development principles. In his book,One Small Step Can Change Your life: The Kaizen Way and his eight CD set, The Kaizen Way to Success, Dr. Maurer looks at both personal and professional success using the kaizen approach.[8] In their book The Toyota Way Fieldbook, Jeffrey Liker, and David Meier discuss the kaizen blitz and kaizen burst (or kaizen event) approaches to continuous improvement. A kaizen blitz, or rapid improvement, is a focused activity on a particular process or activity. The basic concept is to identify and quickly remove waste. Another approach is that of the kaizen burst, a specific kaizen activity on a particular process in the value stream.[9] WebKaizen Events, written by Kate Cornell, condenses the philosophies of kaizen events into a one-day, problem solving method that leads to prioritized solutions. This method combines Kaizen Event tools with PMP concepts. It introduces the Focused Affinity Matrix and the Cascading Impact Analysis. The Impact/Constraint Diagram and the Dual Constraint Diagram are tools used in this method.[10] Key elements of kaizen are quality, effort, involvement of all employees, willingness to change, and communication.

The PDCA cycles



The five main elements of kaizen
• • • • • Teamwork Personal discipline Improved morale Quality circles Suggestions for improvement

Some critics of kaizen claim that the cost-cutting measures come at the expense of fair labor practices and quality products. Examples include: • Accusations of death by overwork at Toyota that included unpaid "so-called voluntary quality control meetings held after regular work hours".[11] • Suppliers refusing to accept orders from Toyota or its affiliates due to successive price cuts.[12] • A four-year-old memo from Japanese factory workers warning that safety was being put at risk by aggressive cost-cutting.[13] • In healthcare, direct-care providers such as nurses have gone on strike over these streamlining procedures, because "procedure times can’t always be standardized". Hospitals have used these streamlining procedures as an excuse to cut patient-care staff.[14] • Although Kaizen is supposed to involve input from all employees, critics claim that in reality front-line workers are not consulted.[15] Also see above re: memo from Japanese factory workers.

[1] Julie Weed (July 10, 2010). "Factory Efficiency Comes to the Hospital" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 07/ 11/ business/ 11seattle. html). The New York Times. . [2] M. M. Feldman. "Kaizen in Psychotherapy" (http:/ / pb. rcpsych. org/ cgi/ reprint/ 16/ 6/ 334. pdf). . [3] Imai, Masaaki (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. New York, NY, US: Random House. [4] Europe Japan Centre, Kaizen Strategies for Improving Team Performance, Ed. Michael Colenso, London: Pearson Education Limited, 2000 [5] Tozawa, Bunji; Japan Human Relations Association (1995). The improvement engine: creativity & innovation through employee involvement: the Kaizen teian system (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=1vqyBirIQLkC& pg=PA34). Productivity Press. p. 34. ISBN 9781563270109. . Retrieved 6 February 2010. [6] Laraia, Anthony C.; Patricia E. Moody, Robert W. Hall (1999). The Kaizen Blitz: accelerating breakthroughs in productivity and performance (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=mZgEBdQhjAAC). John Wiley and Sons. p. 26. ISBN 9780471246480. . Retrieved 6 February 2010. [7] "Robert Maurer, PhD" (http:/ / www. scienceofexcellence. com/ about-robert-maurer-phd. php). . [8] Robert Maurer, PhD. "One Small Step Can Change Your Life" (http:/ / www. scienceofexcellence. com/ one-small-step-can-change-your-life-book. php). . [9] Liker, J.; s= D. Meier (2006). The Toyota Way Fieldbook. New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill. [10] Cornell, Kate (2010). WebKaizen Events. Omaha, NE, US: Prevail Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9831102-1-7. [11] "Questions rise about temps, overwork at Toyota" (http:/ / www. nlcnet. org/ newsroom?id=0030). . [12] Martin Fackler (February 24, 2010). "At Home, Toyota's Woes Include Mounting Anger Among Former Friends" (http:/ / query. nytimes. com/ gst/ fullpage. html?res=9406E6D91F3DF937A15751C0A9669D8B63& sec=& spon=& pagewanted=1). The New York Times. . [13] Andrew Clark (2010-03-11). "Japanese union memo adds to Toyota's safety woes" (http:/ / www. guardian. co. uk/ business/ 2010/ mar/ 11/ toyota-memo-refuels-safety-row). The Guardian (London). . [14] Julie Weed (July 10, 2010). "Factory Efficiency Comes to the Hospital" (http:/ / www. nytimes. com/ 2010/ 07/ 11/ business/ 11seattle. html). The New York Times. . [15] Nellie Munn re: NYTimes article "Factory Efficiency Comes to the Hospital": "I was disappointed in this article, and you would be too if you knew the nature of discussion with the reporter that resulted in this-and that they never used the comments I made about how lean is actually implemented-i.e. mgmt has already decided the outcome before they send you to the "event" to pretend that you developed the solution."



Further reading
• Cooper, Mary Pat (2008). Kaizen Sketchbook: The Comprehensive Illustrated Field Guide to Kaizen. Moffitt Associates. ISBN 978-0-615-19011-2. • Dinero, Donald (2005). Training Within Industry: The Foundation of. Productivity Press. ISBN 1-56327-307-1. • Emiliani, B.; D. Stec; L. Grasso; J. Stodder (2007). Better Thinking, Better Results: Case Study and Analysis of an Enterprise-Wide Lean Transformation (2e. ed.). Kensington, CT, US: The CLBM, LLC. ISBN 978-0-9722591-2-5. • Imai, Masaaki (1986). Kaizen: The Key to Japan's Competitive Success. McGraw-Hill/Irwin. ISBN 0. • Imai, Masaaki (1997-03-01). Gemba Kaizen: A Commonsense, Low-Cost Approach to Management (1e. ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-031446-2. • Scotchmer, Andrew (2008). 5S Kaizen in 90 Minutes. Management Books 2000 Ltd. ISBN 978-1-8525254-7-7. • Cornell, Kate (2010). WebKaizen Events. Prevail Publishing. ISBN 978-0-9831102-1-7.

External links
• Kaizen and Process Improvement (http://www.shmula.com/2035/no-standard-then-no-kaizen) Written by Shmula • Guide to Kaizen question and answer (http://www.creativesafetysupply.com/kaizenguide.html) Written by Mike Wilson • Toyota stumbles but its "kaizen" cult endures (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6161RV20100208) Reuters • Practice your personal Kaizen (http://lifehacker.com/207029/practice-your-personal-kaizen) Written by Jason Thomas

Lean manufacturing
Lean manufacturing or lean production, often simply, "Lean," is a production practice that considers the expenditure of resources for any goal other than the creation of value for the end customer to be wasteful, and thus a target for elimination. Working from the perspective of the customer who consumes a product or service, "value" is defined as any action or process that a customer would be willing to pay for. Basically, lean is centered on preserving value with less work. Lean manufacturing is a generic process management philosophy derived mostly from the Toyota Production System (TPS) (hence the term Toyotism is also prevalent) and identified as "Lean" only in the 1990s.[1] [2] It is renowned for its focus on reduction of the original Toyota seven wastes to improve overall customer value, but there are varying perspectives on how this is best achieved. The steady growth of Toyota, from a small company to the world's largest automaker,[3] has focused attention on how it has achieved this. Lean manufacturing is a variation on the theme of efficiency based on optimizing flow; it is a present-day instance of the recurring theme in human history toward increasing efficiency, decreasing waste, and using empirical methods to decide what matters, rather than uncritically accepting pre-existing ideas. As such, it is a chapter in the larger narrative that also includes such ideas as the folk wisdom of thrift, time and motion study, Taylorism, the Efficiency Movement, and Fordism. Lean manufacturing is often seen as a more refined version of earlier efficiency efforts, building upon the work of earlier leaders such as Taylor or Ford, and learning from their mistakes.

Lean manufacturing


Lean principles come from the Japanese manufacturing industry. The term was first coined by John Krafcik in a Fall 1988 article, "Triumph of the Lean Production System," published in the Sloan Management Review and based on his master's thesis at the MIT Sloan School of Management.[4] Krafcik had been a quality engineer in the Toyota-GM NUMMI joint venture in California before coming to MIT for MBA studies. Krafcik's research was continued by the International Motor Vehicle Program (IMVP) at MIT, which produced the international best-seller book co-authored by Jim Womack, Daniel Jones, and Daniel Roos called The Machine That Changed the World.[1] A complete historical account of the IMVP and how the term "lean" was coined is given by Holweg (2007).[2] For many, Lean is the set of "tools" that assist in the identification and steady elimination of waste (muda). As waste is eliminated quality improves while production time and cost are reduced. Examples of such "tools" are Value Stream Mapping, Five S, Kanban (pull systems), and poka-yoke (error-proofing). There is a second approach to Lean Manufacturing, which is promoted by Toyota, in which the focus is upon improving the "flow" or smoothness of work, thereby steadily eliminating mura ("unevenness") through the system and not upon 'waste reduction' per se. Techniques to improve flow include production leveling, "pull" production (by means of kanban) and the Heijunka box. This is a fundamentally different approach from most improvement methodologies, which may partially account for its lack of popularity. The difference between these two approaches is not the goal itself, but rather the prime approach to achieving it. The implementation of smooth flow exposes quality problems that already existed, and thus waste reduction naturally happens as a consequence. The advantage claimed for this approach is that it naturally takes a system-wide perspective, whereas a waste focus sometimes wrongly assumes this perspective. Both Lean and TPS can be seen as a loosely connected set of potentially competing principles whose goal is cost reduction by the elimination of waste.[5] These principles include: Pull processing, Perfect first-time quality, Waste minimization, Continuous improvement, Flexibility, Building and maintaining a long term relationship with suppliers, Autonomation, Load leveling and Production flow and Visual control. The disconnected nature of some of these principles perhaps springs from the fact that the TPS has grown pragmatically since 1948 as it responded to the problems it saw within its own production facilities. Thus what one sees today is the result of a 'need' driven learning to improve where each step has built on previous ideas and not something based upon a theoretical framework. Toyota's view is that the main method of Lean is not the tools, but the reduction of three types of waste: muda ("non-value-adding work"), muri ("overburden"), and mura ("unevenness"), to expose problems systematically and to use the tools where the ideal cannot be achieved. From this perspective, the tools are workarounds adapted to different situations, which explains any apparent incoherence of the principles above.

Also known as the flexible mass production, the TPS has two pillar concepts: Just-in-time (JIT) or "flow", and "autonomation" (smart automation).[6] Adherents of the Toyota approach would say that the smooth flowing delivery of value achieves all the other improvements as side-effects. If production flows perfectly then there is no inventory; if customer valued features are the only ones produced, then product design is simplified and effort is only expended on features the customer values. The other of the two TPS pillars is the very human aspect of autonomation, whereby automation is achieved with a human touch.[7] The "human touch" here meaning to automate so that the machines/systems are designed to aid humans in focusing on what the humans do best. This aims, for example, to give the machines enough intelligence to recognize when they are working abnormally and flag this for human attention. Thus, in this case, humans would not have to monitor normal production and only have to focus on abnormal, or fault, conditions. Lean implementation is therefore focused on getting the right things to the right place at the right time in the right quantity to achieve perfect work flow, while minimizing waste and being flexible and able to change. These concepts

Lean manufacturing of flexibility and change are principally required to allow production leveling, using tools like SMED, but have their analogues in other processes such as research and development (R&D). The flexibility and ability to change are within bounds and not open-ended, and therefore often not expensive capability requirements. More importantly, all of these concepts have to be understood, appreciated, and embraced by the actual employees who build the products and therefore own the processes that deliver the value. The cultural and managerial aspects of Lean are possibly more important than the actual tools or methodologies of production itself. There are many examples of Lean tool implementation without sustained benefit, and these are often blamed on weak understanding of Lean throughout the whole organization. Lean aims to make the work simple enough to understand, do and manage. To achieve these three goals at once there is a belief held by some that Toyota's mentoring process,(loosely called Senpai and Kohai), which is Japanese for senior and junior, is one of the best ways to foster Lean Thinking up and down the organizational structure. This is the process undertaken by Toyota as it helps its suppliers improve their own production. The closest equivalent to Toyota's mentoring process is the concept of "Lean Sensei," which encourages companies, organizations, and teams to seek outside, third-party experts, who can provide unbiased advice and coaching, (see Womack et al., Lean Thinking, 1998). There have been recent attempts to link Lean to Service Management, perhaps one of the most recent and spectacular of which was London Heathrow Airport's Terminal 5. This particular case provides a graphic example of how care should be taken in translating successful practices from one context (production) to another (services), expecting the same results. In this case the public perception is more of a spectacular failure, than a spectacular success, resulting in potentially an unfair tainting of the lean manufacturing philosophies.[8]


A brief history of waste reduction thinking
The avoidance and then lateral removal of waste has a long history, and as such this history forms much of the basis of the philosophy now known as "Lean". In fact many of the concepts now seen as key to lean have been discovered and rediscovered over the years by others in their search to reduce waste.

Pre-20th century
Most of the basic goals of lean manufacturing are common sense, and documented examples can be seen as early as Benjamin Franklin. Poor Richard's Almanac says of wasted time, "He that idly loses 5s. worth of time, loses 5s., and might as prudently throw 5s. into the river." He added that avoiding unnecessary costs could be more profitable than increasing sales: "A penny saved is two pence clear. A pin a-day is a groat a-year. Save and have." Again Franklin's The Way to Wealth says the following about carrying unnecessary inventory. "You call them goods; but, if you do not take care, they will prove evils to some of you. You expect they will be sold cheap, and, perhaps, they may [be bought] for less than they cost; but, if you have no occasion for them, they must be dear to you. Remember The printer Benjamin Franklin contributed what Poor Richard says, 'Buy what thou hast no need of, and ere long greatly to waste reduction thinking thou shalt sell thy necessaries.' In another place he says, 'Many have been ruined by buying good penny worths'." Henry Ford cited Franklin as a major influence on his own business practices, which included Just-in-time manufacturing. The concept of waste being built into jobs and then taken for granted was noticed by motion efficiency expert Frank Gilbreth, who saw that masons bent over to pick up bricks from the ground. The bricklayer was therefore lowering

Lean manufacturing and raising his entire upper body to pick up a 2.3 kg (5 lb.) brick, and this inefficiency had been built into the job through long practice. Introduction of a non-stooping scaffold, which delivered the bricks at waist level, allowed masons to work about three times as quickly, and with less effort.


20th century
Frederick Winslow Taylor, the father of scientific management, introduced what are now called standardization and best practice deployment. In his Principles of Scientific Management, (1911), Taylor said: "And whenever a workman proposes an improvement, it should be the policy of the management to make a careful analysis of the new method, and if necessary conduct a series of experiments to determine accurately the relative merit of the new suggestion and of the old standard. And whenever the new method is found to be markedly superior to the old, it should be adopted as the standard for the whole establishment." Taylor also warned explicitly against cutting piece rates (or, by implication, cutting wages or discharging workers) when efficiency improvements reduce the need for raw labor: "…after a workman has had the price per piece of the work he is doing lowered two or three times as a result of his having worked harder and increased his output, he is likely entirely to lose sight of his employer's side of the case and become imbued with a grim determination to have no more cuts if soldiering [marking time, just doing what he is told] can prevent it." Shigeo Shingo, the best-known exponent of single minute exchange of die (SMED) and error-proofing or poka-yoke, cites Principles of Scientific Management as his inspiration.[9] American industrialists recognized the threat of cheap offshore labor to American workers during the 1910s, and explicitly stated the goal of what is now called lean manufacturing as a countermeasure. Henry Towne, past President of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, wrote in the Foreword to Frederick Winslow Taylor's Shop Management (1911), "We are justly proud of the high wage rates which prevail throughout our country, and jealous of any interference with them by the products of the cheaper labor of other countries. To maintain this condition, to strengthen our control of home markets, and, above all, to broaden our opportunities in foreign markets where we must compete with the products of other industrial nations, we should welcome and encourage every influence tending to increase the efficiency of our productive processes."

Ford starts the ball rolling
Henry Ford continued this focus on waste while developing his mass assembly manufacturing system. Charles Buxton Going wrote in 1915: Ford's success has startled the country, almost the world, financially, industrially, mechanically. It exhibits in higher degree than most persons would have thought possible the seemingly contradictory requirements of true efficiency, which are: constant increase of quality, great increase of pay to the workers, repeated reduction in cost to the consumer. And with these appears, as at once cause and effect, an absolutely incredible enlargement of output reaching something like one hundredfold in less than ten years, and an enormous profit to the manufacturer.[10] Ford, in My Life and Work (1922),[11] provided a single-paragraph description that encompasses the entire concept of waste: I believe that the average farmer puts to a really useful purpose only about 5%. of the energy he expends.... Not only is everything done by hand, but seldom is a thought given to a logical arrangement. A farmer doing his chores will walk up and down a rickety ladder a dozen times. He will carry water for years instead of putting in a few lengths of pipe. His whole idea, when there is extra work to do, is to hire extra men. He thinks of putting money into improvements as an expense.... It is waste motion— waste effort— that makes farm prices high and profits low.

Lean manufacturing Poor arrangement of the workplace—a major focus of the modern kaizen—and doing a job inefficiently out of habit—are major forms of waste even in modern workplaces. Ford also pointed out how easy it was to overlook material waste. A former employee, Harry Bennett, wrote: One day when Mr. Ford and I were together he spotted some rust in the slag that ballasted the right of way of the D. T. & I [railroad]. This slag had been dumped there from our own furnaces. 'You know,' Mr. Ford said to me, 'there's iron in that slag. You make the crane crews who put it out there sort it over, and take it back to the plant.'[12] In other words, Ford saw the rust and realized that the steel plant was not recovering all of the iron. Ford's early success, however, was not sustainable. As James Womack and Daniel Jones pointed out in "Lean Thinking", what Ford accomplished represented the "special case" rather than a robust lean solution.[13] The major challenge that Ford faced was that his methods were built for a steady-state environment, rather than for the dynamic conditions firms increasingly face today.[14] Although his rigid, top-down controls made it possible to hold variation in work activities down to very low levels, his approach did not respond well to uncertain, dynamic business conditions; they responded particularly badly to the need for new product innovation. This was made clear by Ford's precipitous decline when the company was forced to finally introduce a follow-on to the Model T (see Lean Dynamics). Design for Manufacture (DFM) also is a Ford concept. Ford said in My Life and Work (the same reference describes just in time manufacturing very explicitly): ...entirely useless parts [may be]—a shoe, a dress, a house, a piece of machinery, a railroad, a steamship, an airplane. As we cut out useless parts and simplify necessary ones, we also cut down the cost of making. ... But also it is to be remembered that all the parts are designed so that they can be most easily made. This standardization of parts was central to Ford's concept of mass production, and the manufacturing "tolerances", or upper and lower dimensional limits that ensured interchangeability of parts became widely applied across manufacturing. Decades later, the renowned Japanese quality guru, Genichi Taguchi, demonstrated that this "goal post" method of measuring was inadequate. He showed that "loss" in capabilities did not begin only after exceeding these tolerances, but increased as described by the Taguchi Loss Function at any condition exceeding the nominal condition. This became an important part of W. Edwards Deming's quality movement of the 1980s, later helping to develop improved understanding of key areas of focus such as cycle time variation in improving manufacturing quality and efficiencies in aerospace and other industries. While Ford is renowned for his production line it is often not recognized how much effort he put into removing the fitters' work to make the production line possible. Until Ford, a car's components always had to be fitted or reshaped by a skilled engineer at the point of use, so that they would connect properly. By enforcing very strict specification and quality criteria on component manufacture, he eliminated this work almost entirely, reducing manufacturing effort by between 60-90%.[15] However, Ford's mass production system failed to incorporate the notion of "pull production" and thus often suffered from over-production.


Toyota develops TPS
Toyota's development of ideas that later became Lean may have started at the turn of the 20th century with Sakichi Toyoda, in a textile factory with looms that stopped themselves when a thread broke, this became the seed of autonomation and Jidoka. Toyota's journey with JIT may have started back in 1934 when it moved from textiles to produce its first car. Kiichiro Toyoda, founder of Toyota, directed the engine casting work and discovered many problems in their manufacture. He decided he must stop the repairing of poor quality by intense study of each stage of the process. In 1936, when Toyota won its first truck contract with the Japanese government, his processes hit new problems and he developed the "Kaizen" improvement teams.

Lean manufacturing Levels of demand in the Post War economy of Japan were low and the focus of mass production on lowest cost per item via economies of scale therefore had little application. Having visited and seen supermarkets in the USA, Taiichi Ohno recognised the scheduling of work should not be driven by sales or production targets but by actual sales. Given the financial situation during this period, over-production had to be avoided and thus the notion of Pull (build to order rather than target driven Push) came to underpin production scheduling. It was with Taiichi Ohno at Toyota that these themes came together. He built on the already existing internal schools of thought and spread their breadth and use into what has now become the Toyota Production System (TPS). It is principally from the TPS, but now including many other sources, that Lean production is developing. Norman Bodek wrote the following in his foreword to a reprint of Ford's Today and Tomorrow: I was first introduced to the concepts of just-in-time (JIT) and the Toyota production system in 1980. Subsequently I had the opportunity to witness its actual application at Toyota on one of our numerous Japanese study missions. There I met Mr. Taiichi Ohno, the system's creator. When bombarded with questions from our group on what inspired his thinking, he just laughed and said he learned it all from Henry Ford's book." The scale, rigor and continuous learning aspects of TPS have made it a core concept of Lean.


Types of waste
While the elimination of waste may seem like a simple and clear subject it is noticeable that waste is often very conservatively identified. This then hugely reduces the potential of such an aim. The elimination of waste is the goal of Lean, and Toyota defined three broad types of waste: muda, muri and mura; it should be noted that for many Lean implementations this list shrinks to the first waste type only with corresponding benefits decrease. To illustrate the state of this thinking Shigeo Shingo observed that only the last turn of a bolt tightens it—the rest is just movement. This ever finer clarification of waste is key to establishing distinctions between value-adding activity, waste and non-value-adding work.[16] Non-value adding work is waste that must be done under the present work conditions. One key is to measure, or estimate, the size of these wastes, to demonstrate the effect of the changes achieved and therefore the movement toward the goal. The "flow" (or smoothness) based approach aims to achieve JIT, by removing the variation caused by work scheduling and thereby provide a driver, rationale or target and priorities for implementation, using a variety of techniques. The effort to achieve JIT exposes many quality problems that are hidden by buffer stocks; by forcing smooth flow of only value-adding steps, these problems become visible and must be dealt with explicitly. Muri is all the unreasonable work that management imposes on workers and machines because of poor organization, such as carrying heavy weights, moving things around, dangerous tasks, even working significantly faster than usual. It is pushing a person or a machine beyond its natural limits. This may simply be asking a greater level of performance from a process than it can handle without taking shortcuts and informally modifying decision criteria. Unreasonable work is almost always a cause of multiple variations. To link these three concepts is simple in TPS and thus Lean. Firstly, muri focuses on the preparation and planning of the process, or what work can be avoided proactively by design. Next, mura then focuses on how the work design is implemented and the elimination of fluctuation at the scheduling or operations level, such as quality and volume. Muda is then discovered after the process is in place and is dealt with reactively. It is seen through variation in output. It is the role of management to examine the muda, in the processes and eliminate the deeper causes by considering the connections to the muri and mura of the system. The muda and mura inconsistencies must be fed back to the muri, or planning, stage for the next project. A typical example of the interplay of these wastes is the corporate behaviour of "making the numbers" as the end of a reporting period approaches. Demand is raised to 'make plan,' increasing (mura), when the "numbers" are low, which causes production to try to squeeze extra capacity from the process, which causes routines and standards to be modified or stretched. This stretch and improvisation leads to muri-style waste, which leads to downtime, mistakes and back flows, and waiting, thus the muda of waiting, correction and movement.

Lean manufacturing The original seven muda are: • • • • • • • Transport (moving products that is not actually required to perform the processing) Inventory (all components, work in process and finished product not being processed) Motion (people or equipment moving or walking more than is required to perform the processing) Waiting (waiting for the next production step) Overproduction (production ahead of demand) Over Processing (resulting from poor tool or product design creating activity) Defects (the effort involved in inspecting for and fixing defects)[17]


Later an eighth waste was defined by Womack et al. (2003); it was described as manufacturing goods or services that do not meet customer demand or specifications. Many others have added the "waste of unused human talent" to the original seven wastes. These wastes were not originally a part of the seven deadly wastes defined by Taiichi Ohno in TPS, but were found to be useful additions in practice. For a complete listing of the "old" and "new" wastes see Bicheno and Holweg (2009)[18] Some of these definitions may seem rather idealistic, but this tough definition is seen as important and they drove the success of TPS. The clear identification of non-value-adding work, as distinct from wasted work, is critical to identifying the assumptions behind the current work process and to challenging them in due course.[19] Breakthroughs in SMED and other process changing techniques rely upon clear identification of where untapped opportunities may lie if the processing assumptions are challenged.

Lean implementation develops from TPS
The discipline required to implement Lean and the disciplines it seems to require are so often counter-cultural that they have made successful implementation of Lean a major challenge. Some[20] would say that it was a major challenge in its manufacturing 'heartland' as well. Implementations under the Lean label are numerous and whether they are Lean and whether any success or failure can be laid at Lean's door is often debatable. Individual examples of success and failure exist in almost all spheres of business and activity and therefore cannot be taken as indications of whether Lean is particularly applicable to a specific sector of activity. It seems clear from the "successes" that no sector is immune from beneficial possibility. Lean is about more than just cutting costs in the factory.[21] One crucial insight is that most costs are assigned when a product is designed, (see Genichi Taguchi). Often an engineer will specify familiar, safe materials and processes rather than inexpensive, efficient ones. This reduces project risk, that is, the cost to the engineer, while increasing financial risks, and decreasing profits. Good organizations develop and review checklists to review product designs. Companies must often look beyond the shop-floor to find opportunities for improving overall company cost and performance. At the system engineering level, requirements are reviewed with marketing and customer representatives to eliminate those requirements that are costly. Shared modules may be developed, such as multipurpose power supplies or shared mechanical components or fasteners. Requirements are assigned to the cheapest discipline. For example, adjustments may be moved into software, and measurements away from a mechanical solution to an electronic solution. Another approach is to choose connection or power-transport methods that are cheap or that used standardized components that become available in a competitive market.

Lean manufacturing


An example program
In summary, an example of a lean implementation program could be:
With a tools-based approach With a muri or flow based approach (as used in the TPS with suppliers ). • [22]

• • •

• •

Sort out as many of the visible quality problems as you can, as well as downtime and other instability problems, and get the internal scrap acknowledged and its management started. Make the flow of parts through the system or process as continuous as possible using workcells and market locations where necessary and avoiding variations in the operators work cycle Introduce standard work and stabilise the work pace through the system Start pulling work through the system, look at the production scheduling and move toward daily orders with kanban cards Even out the production flow by reducing batch sizes, increase delivery frequency internally and if possible externally, level internal demand Improve exposed quality issues using the tools Remove some people (or increase quotas) and go through this work again (the Oh No !! moment)

• • • • • •

• • • • •

Senior management to agree and discuss their lean vision Management brainstorm to identify project leader and set objectives Communicate plan and vision to the workforce Ask for volunteers to form the Lean Implementation team (5-7 works best, all from different departments) Appoint members of the Lean Manufacturing Implementation Team Train the Implementation Team in the various lean tools make a point of trying to visit other non competing businesses that have implemented lean Select a Pilot Project to implement – 5S is a good place to start Run the pilot for 2–3 months - evaluate, review and learn from your mistakes Roll out pilot to other factory areas Evaluate results, encourage feedback Stabilize the positive results by teaching supervisors how to train the new standards you've developed with TWI methodology (Training Within Industry) Once you are satisfied that you have a habitual program, consider introducing the next lean tool. Select the one that gives you the biggest return for your business.

Lean leadership
The role of the leaders within the organization is the fundamental element of sustaining the progress of lean thinking. Experienced kaizen members at Toyota, for example, often bring up the concepts of Senpai, Kohai, and Sensei, because they strongly feel that transferring of Toyota culture down and across Toyota can only happen when more experienced Toyota Sensei continuously coach and guide the less experienced lean champions. Unfortunately, most lean practitioners in North America focus on the tools and methodologies of lean, versus the philosophy and culture of lean. Some exceptions include Shingijitsu Consulting out of Japan, which is made up of ex-Toyota managers, and Lean Sensei International based in North America, which coaches lean through Toyota-style cultural experience.

Lean manufacturing One of the dislocative effects of Lean is in the area of key performance indicators (KPI). The KPIs by which a plant/facility are judged will often be driving behaviour, because the KPIs themselves assume a particular approach to the work being done. This can be an issue where, for example a truly Lean, Fixed Repeating Schedule (FRS) and JIT approach is adopted, because these KPIs will no longer reflect performance, as the assumptions on which they are based become invalid. It is a key leadership challenge to manage the impact of this KPI chaos within the organization. Similarly, commonly used accounting systems developed to support mass production are no longer appropriate for companies pursuing Lean. Lean Accounting provides truly Lean approaches to business management and financial reporting. After formulating the guiding principles of its lean manufacturing approach in the Toyota Production System (TPS) Toyota formalized in 2001 the basis of its lean management: the key managerial values and attitudes needed to sustain continuous improvement in the long run. These core management principles are articulated around the twin pillars of Continuous Improvement (relentless elimination of waste) and Respect for People (engagement in long term relationships based on continuous improvement and mutual trust). This formalization stems from problem solving. As Toyota expanded beyond its home base for the past 20 years, it hit the same problems in getting TPS properly applied that other western companies have had in copying TPS. Like any other problem, it has been working on trying a series of countermeasures to solve this particular concern. These countermeasures have focused on culture: how people behave, which is the most difficult challenge of all. Without the proper behavioral principles and values, TPS can be totally misapplied and fail to deliver results. As one sensei said, one can create a Buddha image and forget to inject soul in it. As with TPS, the values had originally been passed down in a master-disciple manner, from boss to subordinate, without any written statement on the way. And just as with TPS, it was internally argued that formalizing the values would stifle them and lead to further misunderstanding. But as Toyota veterans eventually wrote down the basic principles of TPS, Toyota set to put the Toyota Way into writing to educate new joiners.[23] Continuous Improvement breaks down into three basic principles: 1. Challenge: Having a long term vision of the challenges one needs to face to realize one's ambition (what we need to learn rather than what we want to do and then having the spirit to face that challenge). To do so, we have to challenge ourselves every day to see if we are achieving our goals. 2. Kaizen: Good enough never is, no process can ever be thought perfect, so operations must be improved continuously, striving for innovation and evolution. 3. Genchi Genbutsu: Going to the source to see the facts for oneself and make the right decisions, create consensus, and make sure goals are attained at the best possible speed. Respect For People is less known outside of Toyota, and essentially involves two defining principles: 1. Respect: Taking every stakeholders' problems seriously, and making every effort to build mutual trust. Taking responsibility for other people reaching their objectives. 2. Teamwork: This is about developing individuals through team problem-solving. The idea is to develop and engage people through their contribution to team performance. Shop floor teams, the whole site as team, and team Toyota at the outset.


Lean manufacturing


Differences from TPS
Whilst Lean is seen by many as a generalization of the Toyota Production System into other industries and contexts there are some acknowledged differences that seem to have developed in implementation. 1. Seeking profit is a relentless focus for Toyota exemplified by the profit maximization principle (Price – Cost = Profit) and the need, therefore, to practice systematic cost reduction (through TPS or otherwise) to realize benefit. Lean implementations can tend to de-emphasise this key measure and thus become fixated with the implementation of improvement concepts of “flow” or “pull”. However, the emergence of the "value curve analysis" promises to directly tie lean improvements to bottom-line performance measuments.20 2. Tool orientation is a tendency in many programs to elevate mere tools (standardized work, value stream mapping, visual control, etc.) to an unhealthy status beyond their pragmatic intent. The tools are just different ways to work around certain types of problems but they do not solve them for you or always highlight the underlying cause of many types of problems. The tools employed at Toyota are often used to expose particular problems that are then dealt with, as each tool's limitations or blindspots are perhaps better understood. So, for example, Value Stream Mapping focuses upon material and information flow problems (a title built into the Toyota title for this activity) but is not strong on Metrics, Man or Method. Internally they well know the limits of the tool and understood that it was never intended as the best way to see and analyze every waste or every problem related to quality, downtime, personnel development, cross training related issues, capacity bottlenecks, or anything to do with profits, safety, metrics or morale, etc. No one tool can do all of that. For surfacing these issues other tools are much more widely and effectively used. 3. Management technique rather than change agents has been a principle in Toyota from the early 1950s when they started emphasizing the development of the production manager's and supervisors' skills set in guiding natural work teams and did not rely upon staff-level change agents to drive improvements. This can manifest itself as a "Push" implementation of Lean rather than "Pull" by the team itself. This area of skills development is not that of the change agent specialist, but that of the natural operations work team leader. Although less prestigious than the TPS specialists, development of work team supervisors in Toyota is considered an equally, if not more important, topic merely because there are tens of thousands of these individuals. Specifically, it is these manufacturing leaders that are the main focus of training efforts in Toyota since they lead the daily work areas, and they directly and dramatically affect quality, cost, productivity, safety, and morale of the team environment. In many companies implementing Lean the reverse set of priorities is true. Emphasis is put on developing the specialist, while the supervisor skill level is expected to somehow develop over time on its own.

Lean services
Lean, as a concept or brand, has captured the imagination of many in different spheres of activity. Examples of these from many sectors are listed below. Lean principles have been successfully applied to call center services to improve live agent call handling. By combining Agent-assisted Voice solutions and Lean's waste reduction practices, a company reduced handle time, reduced between agent variability, reduced accent barriers, and attained near perfect process adherence. [24] Lean principles have also found application in software application development and maintenance and other areas of information technology (IT).[25] More generally, the use of Lean in IT has become known as Lean IT. A study conducted on behalf of the Scottish Executive, by Warwick University, in 2005/06 found that Lean methods were applicable to the public sector, but that most results had been achieved using a much more restricted range of techniques than Lean provides.[26] The challenge in moving Lean to services is the lack of widely available reference implementations to allow people to see how directly applying lean manufacturing tools and practices can work and the impact it does have. This makes it more difficult to build the level of belief seen as necessary for strong implementation. However, some

Lean manufacturing research does relate widely recognized examples of success in retail and even airlines to the underlying principles of lean.[14] Despite this, it remains the case that the direct manufacturing examples of 'techniques' or 'tools' need to be better 'translated' into a service context to support the more prominent approaches of implementation, which has not yet received the level of work or publicity that would give starting points for implementors. The upshot of this is that each implementation often 'feels its way' along as must the early industrial engineers of Toyota. This places huge importance upon sponsorship to encourage and protect these experimental developments.


Lean goals and strategy
The espoused goals of Lean manufacturing systems differ between various authors. While some maintain an internal focus, e.g. to increase profit for the organization,[27] others claim that improvements should be done for the sake of the customer [28] Some commonly mentioned goals are: • Improve quality: To stay competitive in today’s marketplace, a company must understand its customers' wants and needs and design processes to meet their expectations and requirements. • Eliminate waste: Waste is any activity that consumes time, resources, or space but does not add any value to the product or service. See Types of waste, above. Taking the first letter of each waste, the acronym "TIM WOOD" is formed. This is a common way to remember the wastes. • Reduce time: Reducing the time it takes to finish an activity from start to finish is one of the most effective ways to eliminate waste and lower costs. • Reduce total costs: To minimize cost, a company must produce only to customer demand. Overproduction increases a company’s inventory costs because of storage needs. The strategic elements of Lean can be quite complex, and comprise multiple elements. Four different notions of Lean have been identified [29] : 1. 2. 3. 4. Lean as a fixed state or goal (Being Lean) Lean as a continuous change process (Becoming Lean) Lean as a set of tools or methods (Doing Lean/Toolbox Lean) Lean as a philosophy (Lean thinking)

Steps to achieve lean systems
The following steps should be implemented to create the ideal lean manufacturing system: [30]: 1. Design a simple manufacturing system 2. Recognize that there is always room for improvement 3. Continuously improve the lean manufacturing system design

Design a simple manufacturing system
A fundamental principle of lean manufacturing is demand-based flow manufacturing. In this type of production setting, inventory is only pulled through each production center when it is needed to meet a customer’s order. The benefits of this goal include: [30]: • decreased cycle time • less inventory • increased productivity • increased capital equipment utilization

Lean manufacturing


There is always room for improvement
The core of lean is founded on the concept of continuous product and process improvement and the elimination of non-value added activities. “The Value adding activities are simply only those things the customer is willing to pay for, everything else is waste, and should be eliminated, simplified, reduced, or integrated”(Rizzardo, 2003). Improving the flow of material through new ideal system layouts at the customer's required rate would reduce waste in material movement and inventory. [30]

Continuously improve
A continuous improvement mindset is essential to reach a company's goals. The term "continuous improvement" means incremental improvement of products, processes, or services over time, with the goal of reducing waste to improve workplace functionality, customer service, or product performance (Suzaki, 1987). Stephen Shortell (Professor of Health Services Management and Organisational Behaviour – Berkeley University, California) states:“For improvement to flourish it must be carefully cultivated in a rich soil bed (a receptive organisation), given constant attention (sustained leadership), assured the right amounts of light (training and support) and water (measurement and data) and protected from damaging."

Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) is a set of performance metrics that fit well in a Lean environment.

[1] Womack, James P.; Daniel T. Jones, and Daniel Roos (1990). The Machine That Changed the World. [2] Holweg, Matthias (2007). "The genealogy of lean production". Journal of Operations Management 25 (2): 420–437. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2006.04.001. [3] Bailey, David. "Automotive News calls Toyota world No 1 car maker" (http:/ / www. reuters. com/ article/ businessNews/ idUSN2424076820080124). Reuters.com. Reuters. . Retrieved 19 April 2008. [4] Krafcik, John F. (1988). "Triumph of the lean production system". Sloan Management Review 30 (1): 41–52. [5] Ohno, Taiichi (1988). Toyota Production System. Productivity Press. p. 8. ISBN 0-915299-14-3. [6] Taichi Ohno (1988), p 4 [7] Taichi Ohno (1988), p 6 [8] "Problems continue at Heathrow's Terminal 5", New York Times, March 31, 2008 article (http:/ / www. iht. com/ articles/ 2008/ 03/ 31/ europe/ heathrow. php) [9] Andrew Dillon, translator, 1987. The Sayings of Shigeo Shingo: Key Strategies for Plant Improvement). [10] (Charles Buxton Going, preface to Arnold and Faurote, Ford Methods and the Ford Shops (1915)) [11] Ford, Henry; with Crowther, Samuel (1922). My Life and Work (http:/ / www. gutenberg. net/ etext/ 7213). Garden City, New York, USA: Garden City Publishing Company, Inc. . Various republications, including ISBN 9781406500189. Original is public domain in U.S. [12] Bennett, Harry; with Marcus, Paul (1951). We Never Called Him Henry. New York: Fawcett Publications. LCCN 51-036122. [13] Womack, James P.; Daniel T. Jones (2003). Lean Thinking. Free Press. [14] Ruffa, Stephen A. (2008). Going Lean: How the Best Companies Apply Lean Manufacturing Principles to Shatter Uncertainty, Drive Innovation, and Maximize Profits (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=_Q7OGDd61hkC). AMACOM. ISBN 0-8144-1057-X. . [15] Hounshell, David A. (1984), From the American System to Mass Production, 1800-1932: The Development of Manufacturing Technology in the United States, Baltimore, Maryland, USA: Johns Hopkins University Press, LCCN 83-016269, ISBN 978-0-8018-2975-8. pp 248 ff. [16] Toyota Production System, Taichi Ohno, Productivity Press, 1988,, p. 58 [17] Womack, James P.; Daniel T. Jones (2003). Lean Thinking. Free Press. p. 352. [18] Bicheno, John; Matthias Holweg (2009). The Lean Toolbox. PICSIE Books. ISBN 978-0954124458. [19] Toyota Vision and Philosophy (http:/ / www. toyota. co. jp/ en/ vision/ traditions/ jul_aug_04. html) [20] Pat Lancaster of Lean Thinking's Lanchester Technologies reference implementation [21] Maskell & Baggaley (December 19, 2003). "Practical Lean Accounting". Productivity Press, New York, NY. [22] The Gold Mine, F & M Ballé, The Lean Enterprise Institute, 2005, p196 [23] Michael Ballé & Freddy Ballé (2009) The Lean Manager, Lean Enterprise Institute [24] Adsit, Dennis. "Cutting Edge Methods Target Real Call Center Waste" (http:/ / www. isixsigma. com/ library/ content/ c070611a. asp). isixsigma.com. . Retrieved 19 April 2008.

Lean manufacturing
[25] Hanna, Julia. “ Bringing ‘Lean’ Principles to Service Industries (http:/ / hbswk. hbs. edu/ item/ 5741. html)”. HBS Working Knowledge. October 22, 2007. (Summary article based on published research of Professor David Upton of Harvard Business School and doctoral student Bradley Staats: Staats, Bradley R., and David M. Upton. “Lean Principles, Learning, and Software Production: Evidence from Indian Software Services.”. Harvard Business School Working Paper. No. 08-001. July 2007. (Revised July 2008, March 2009.) [26] Radnor, Dr Zoe; Paul Walley, Andrew Stephens, Giovanni Bucci. "Evaluation Of The Lean Approach To Business Management And Its Use In The Public Sector" (http:/ / www. scotland. gov. uk/ Publications/ 2006/ 06/ 13162106/ 0). scotland.gov.uk. . Retrieved 19 April 2008. [27] e.g. Liker, J.K., 2004. The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World’s Greatest Manufacturer, New York: McGraw-Hill., Feld, W.M., 2001. Lean Manufacturing: Tools, Techniques, and How to Use Them, Boca Raton: St. Lucie Press., Ohno, T., 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production, Portland: Productivity Press., Monden, Y., 1998. Toyota production system: an integrated approach to just-in-time, London: Chapman & Hall., Schonberger, R.J., 1982. Japanese Manufacturing Techniques: Nine Hidden Lessons in Simplicity, New York: Free Press., Shingo, S., 1984. A Study of the Toyota Production System from an Industrial Engineering Viewpoint, Tokyo: Japan Management Association. [28] e.g. Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T. & Roos, D., 1990. The machine that changed the world: the story of lean production, New York: Rawson Associates., Womack, J.P. & Jones, D.T., 2003. Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, New York: Free Press., Bicheno, J., 2004. The new lean toolbox: towards fast, flexible flow, Buckingham: PICSIE Books., Dennis, P., 2002. Lean Production Simplified: A Plain Language Guide to the World's Most Powerful Production System, New York: Productivity Press., Schonberger, R.J., 1982. Japanese Manufacturing Techniques: Nine Hidden Lessons in Simplicity, New York: Free Press. [29] Pettersen, J., 2009. Defining lean production: some conceptual and practical issues. The TQM Journal, 21(2), 127 - 142. [30] http:/ / www. sae. org/ manufacturing/ lean/ column/ leandec01. htm


• MacInnes, Richard L. (2002) The Lean Enterprise Memory Jogger • Page, Julian (2003) Implementing Lean Manufacturing Techniques

Six Sigma

The often-used six sigma symbol.

Part of a series of articles on


Manufacturing methods Batch production • Job production Continuous production Improvement methods LM • TPM • QRM • VDM TOC • Six Sigma • RCM Information & communication ISA-88 • ISA-95 • ERP SAP • IEC 62264 • B2MML Process control PLC • DCS

Six Sigma Six Sigma is a business management strategy originally developed by Motorola, USA in 1986.[1] [2] As of 2010, it is widely used in many sectors of industry, although its use is not without controversy. Six Sigma seeks to improve the quality of process outputs by identifying and removing the causes of defects (errors) and minimizing variability in manufacturing and business processes.[3] It uses a set of quality management methods, including statistical methods, and creates a special infrastructure of people within the organization ("Black Belts", "Green Belts", etc.) who are experts in these methods.[3] Each Six Sigma project carried out within an organization follows a defined sequence of steps and has quantified financial targets (cost reduction or profit increase).[3] The term six sigma originated from terminology associated with manufacturing, specifically terms associated with statistical modelling of manufacturing processes. The maturity of a manufacturing process can be described by a sigma rating indicating its yield, or the percentage of defect-free products it creates. A six-sigma process is one in which 99.99966% of the products manufactured are statistically expected to be free of defects (3.4 defects per million). Motorola set a goal of "six sigmas" for all of its manufacturing operations, and this goal became a byword for the management and engineering practices used to achieve it.


Historical overview
Six Sigma originated as a set of practices designed to improve manufacturing processes and eliminate defects, but its application was subsequently extended to other types of business processes as well.[4] In Six Sigma, a defect is defined as any process output that does not meet customer specifications, or that could lead to creating an output that does not meet customer specifications.[3] Bill Smith first formulated the particulars of the methodology at Motorola in 1986.[1] Six Sigma was heavily inspired by six preceding decades of quality improvement methodologies such as quality control, TQM, and Zero Defects,[5] [6] based on the work of pioneers such as Shewhart, Deming, Juran, Ishikawa, Taguchi and others. Like its predecessors, Six Sigma doctrine asserts that: • Continuous efforts to achieve stable and predictable process results (i.e., reduce process variation) are of vital importance to business success. • Manufacturing and business processes have characteristics that can be measured, analyzed, improved and controlled. • Achieving sustained quality improvement requires commitment from the entire organization, particularly from top-level management. Features that set Six Sigma apart from previous quality improvement initiatives include: • A clear focus on achieving measurable and quantifiable financial returns from any Six Sigma project.[3] • An increased emphasis on strong and passionate management leadership and support.[3] • A special infrastructure of "Champions," "Master Black Belts," "Black Belts," "Green Belts", etc. to lead and implement the Six Sigma approach.[3] • A clear commitment to making decisions on the basis of verifiable data, rather than assumptions and guesswork.[3] The term "Six Sigma" comes from a field of statistics known as process capability studies. Originally, it referred to the ability of manufacturing processes to produce a very high proportion of output within specification. Processes that operate with "six sigma quality" over the short term are assumed to produce long-term defect levels below 3.4 defects per million opportunities (DPMO).[7] [8] Six Sigma's implicit goal is to improve all processes to that level of quality or better. Six Sigma is a registered service mark and trademark of Motorola Inc.[9] As of 2006 Motorola reported over US$17 billion in savings[10] from Six Sigma. Other early adopters of Six Sigma who achieved well-publicized success include Honeywell (previously known as AlliedSignal) and General Electric, where Jack Welch introduced the method.[11] By the late 1990s, about two-thirds

Six Sigma of the Fortune 500 organizations had begun Six Sigma initiatives with the aim of reducing costs and improving quality.[12] In recent years, some practitioners have combined Six Sigma ideas with lean manufacturing to yield a methodology named Lean Six Sigma.


Six Sigma projects follow two project methodologies inspired by Deming's Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle. These methodologies, composed of five phases each, bear the acronyms DMAIC and DMADV.[12] • DMAIC is used for projects aimed at improving an existing business process.[12] DMAIC is pronounced as "duh-may-ick". • DMADV is used for projects aimed at creating new product or process designs.[12] DMADV is pronounced as "duh-mad-vee".

The DMAIC project methodology has five phases: • Define the problem, the voice of the customer, and the project goals, specifically. • Measure key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data. • Analyze the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships. Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. Seek out root cause of the defect under investigation. • Improve or optimize the current process based upon data analysis using techniques such as design of experiments, poka yoke or mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new, future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability. • Control the future state process to ensure that any deviations from target are corrected before they result in defects. Implement control systems such as statistical process control, production boards, and visual workplaces, and continuously monitor the process.

The DMADV project methodology, also known as DFSS ("Design For Six Sigma"),[12] features five phases: • Define design goals that are consistent with customer demands and the enterprise strategy. • Measure and identify CTQs (characteristics that are Critical To Quality), product capabilities, production process capability, and risks. • Analyze to develop and design alternatives, create a high-level design and evaluate design capability to select the best design. • Design details, optimize the design, and plan for design verification. This phase may require simulations. • Verify the design, set up pilot runs, implement the production process and hand it over to the process owner(s).

Six Sigma


Quality management tools and methods used in Six Sigma
Within the individual phases of a DMAIC or DMADV project, Six Sigma utilizes many established quality-management tools that are also used outside of Six Sigma. The following table shows an overview of the main methods used.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5 Whys Analysis of variance ANOVA Gauge R&R Axiomatic design Business Process Mapping Cause & effects diagram (also known as fishbone or Ishikawa diagram) Chi-square test of independence and fits Control chart Correlation Cost-benefit analysis CTQ tree Design of experiments Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) General linear model • • • • • • • • • • • • • Histograms Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Pareto chart Pick chart Process capability Quantitative marketing research through use of Enterprise Feedback Management (EFM) systems Regression analysis Root cause analysis Run charts SIPOC analysis (Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Customers) Taguchi methods Taguchi Loss Function TRIZ

Implementation roles
One key innovation of Six Sigma involves the "professionalizing" of quality management functions. Prior to Six Sigma, quality management in practice was largely relegated to the production floor and to statisticians in a separate quality department. Formal Six Sigma programs borrow martial arts ranking terminology to define a hierarchy (and career path) that cuts across all business functions. Six Sigma identifies several key roles for its successful implementation.[13] • Executive Leadership includes the CEO and other members of top management. They are responsible for setting up a vision for Six Sigma implementation. They also empower the other role holders with the freedom and resources to explore new ideas for breakthrough improvements. • Champions take responsibility for Six Sigma implementation across the organization in an integrated manner. The Executive Leadership draws them from upper management. Champions also act as mentors to Black Belts. • Master Black Belts, identified by champions, act as in-house coaches on Six Sigma. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma. They assist champions and guide Black Belts and Green Belts. Apart from statistical tasks, they spend their time on ensuring consistent application of Six Sigma across various functions and departments. • Black Belts operate under Master Black Belts to apply Six Sigma methodology to specific projects. They devote 100% of their time to Six Sigma. They primarily focus on Six Sigma project execution, whereas Champions and Master Black Belts focus on identifying projects/functions for Six Sigma. • Green Belts are the employees who take up Six Sigma implementation along with their other job responsibilities, operating under the guidance of Black Belts. Some organizations use additional belt colours, such as Yellow Belts, for employees that have basic training in Six Sigma tools.

Six Sigma


In the United States, Six Sigma certification for both Green and Black Belts is offered by the Institute of Industrial Engineers[14] and by the American Society for Quality.[15] In addition to these examples, there are many other organizations and companies that offer certification. There currently is no central certification body, either in the United States or anywhere else in the world.

Origin and meaning of the term "six sigma process"
The term "six sigma process" comes from the notion that if one has six standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit, as shown in the graph, practically no items will fail to meet specifications.[8] This is based on the calculation method employed in process capability studies. Capability studies measure the number of standard deviations between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in sigma units. As process standard deviation goes up, or the mean of the process moves away from the center of the tolerance, fewer standard deviations will fit between the mean and the nearest specification limit, decreasing the sigma number and increasing the likelihood of items outside specification.[8]

Role of the 1.5 sigma shift

Experience has shown that processes usually do not perform as well in the long term as they do in the short term.[8] As a result, the number of sigmas that will fit between the process mean and the nearest specification limit may well drop over time, compared to an initial short-term study.[8] To account for this real-life increase in process variation over time, an empirically-based 1.5 sigma shift is introduced into the calculation.[8] [16] According to this idea, a process that fits six sigmas between the process mean and the nearest specification limit in a short-term study will in the long term only fit 4.5 sigmas – either because the process mean will move over time, or because the long-term standard deviation of the process will be greater than that observed in the short term, or both.[8] Hence the widely accepted definition of a six sigma process as one that produces 3.4 defective parts per million opportunities (DPMO). This is based on the fact that a process that is normally distributed will have 3.4 parts per million beyond a point that is 4.5 standard deviations above or below the mean (one-sided capability study).[8] So the 3.4 DPMO of a "Six Sigma" process in fact corresponds to 4.5 sigmas, namely 6 sigmas minus the 1.5 sigma shift introduced to account for long-term variation.[8] This takes account of special causes that may cause a deterioration in process performance over time and is designed to prevent underestimation of the defect levels likely to be encountered in real-life operation.[8]

Graph of the normal distribution, which underlies the statistical assumptions of the Six Sigma model. The Greek letter σ (sigma) marks the distance on the horizontal axis between the mean, µ, and the curve's inflection point. The greater this distance, the greater is the spread of values encountered. For the curve shown above, µ = 0 and σ = 1. The upper and lower specification limits (USL, LSL) are at a distance of 6σ from the mean. Because of the properties of the normal distribution, values lying that far away from the mean are extremely unlikely. Even if the mean were to move right or left by 1.5σ at some point in the future (1.5 sigma shift), there is still a good safety cushion. This is why Six Sigma aims to have processes where the mean is at least 6σ away from the nearest specification limit.

Six Sigma


Sigma levels
The table[17] [18] below gives long-term DPMO values corresponding to various short-term sigma levels. Note that these figures assume that the process mean will shift by 1.5 sigma toward the side with the critical specification limit. In other words, they assume that after the initial study determining the short-term sigma level, the long-term Cpk value will turn out to be 0.5 less than the short-term Cpk value. So, for example, the DPMO figure given for 1 sigma assumes that the long-term process mean will be 0.5 sigma beyond the specification limit (Cpk = –0.17), rather than 1 sigma within it, as it was in the short-term study (Cpk = 0.33). Note that the defect percentages only indicate defects exceeding the specification limit to which the process mean is nearest. Defects beyond the far specification limit are not included in the percentages.
Sigma level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DPMO

A control chart depicting a process that experienced a 1.5 sigma drift in the process mean toward the upper specification limit starting at midnight. Control charts are used to maintain 6 sigma quality by signaling when quality professionals should investigate a process to find and eliminate special-cause variation.

Percent defective

Percentage yield 31% 69% 93.3% 99.38% 99.977% 99.99966% 99.9999981%

Short-term Cpk Long-term Cpk 0.33 0.67 1.00 1.33 1.67 2.00 2.33 –0.17 0.17 0.5 0.83 1.17 1.5 1.83

691,462 69% 308,538 31% 66,807 6,210 233 3.4 0.019 6.7% 0.62% 0.023% 0.00034% 0.0000019%

Six Sigma mostly finds application in large organizations.[19] An important factor in the spread of Six Sigma was GE's 1998 announcement of $350 million in savings thanks to Six Sigma, a figure that later grew to more than $1 billion.[19] According to industry consultants like Thomas Pyzdek and John Kullmann, companies with less than 500 employees are less suited to Six Sigma implementation, or need to adapt the standard approach to make it work for them.[19] This is due both to the infrastructure of Black Belts that Six Sigma requires, and to the fact that large organizations present more opportunities for the kinds of improvements Six Sigma is suited to bringing about.[19]

Six Sigma


Lack of originality
Noted quality expert Joseph M. Juran has described Six Sigma as "a basic version of quality improvement", stating that "there is nothing new there. It includes what we used to call facilitators. They've adopted more flamboyant terms, like belts with different colors. I think that concept has merit to set apart, to create specialists who can be very helpful. Again, that's not a new idea. The American Society for Quality long ago established certificates, such as for reliability engineers."[20]

Role of consultants
The use of "Black Belts" as itinerant change agents has (controversially) fostered an industry of training and certification. Critics argue there is overselling of Six Sigma by too great a number of consulting firms, many of which claim expertise in Six Sigma when they only have a rudimentary understanding of the tools and techniques involved.[3]

Potential negative effects
A Fortune article stated that "of 58 large companies that have announced Six Sigma programs, 91 percent have trailed the S&P 500 since". The statement is attributed to "an analysis by Charles Holland of consulting firm Qualpro (which espouses a competing quality-improvement process)."[21] The summary of the article is that Six Sigma is effective at what it is intended to do, but that it is "narrowly designed to fix an existing process" and does not help in "coming up with new products or disruptive technologies." Advocates of Six Sigma have argued that many of these claims are in error or ill-informed.[22] [23] A BusinessWeek article says that James McNerney's introduction of Six Sigma at 3M may have had the effect of stifling creativity. It cites two Wharton School professors who say that Six Sigma leads to incremental innovation at the expense of blue-sky work.[24] This phenomenon is further explored in the book, Going Lean, which describes a related approach known as lean dynamics and provides data to show that Ford's "6 Sigma" program did little to change its fortunes.[25]

Based on arbitrary standards
While 3.4 defects per million opportunities might work well for certain products/processes, it might not operate optimally or cost effectively for others. A pacemaker process might need higher standards, for example, whereas a direct mail advertising campaign might need lower standards. The basis and justification for choosing 6 (as opposed to 5 or 7, for example) as the number of standard deviations is not clearly explained. In addition, the Six Sigma model assumes that the process data always conform to the normal distribution. The calculation of defect rates for situations where the normal distribution model does not apply is not properly addressed in the current Six Sigma literature.[3]

Criticism of the 1.5 sigma shift
The statistician Donald J. Wheeler has dismissed the 1.5 sigma shift as "goofy" because of its arbitrary nature.[26] Its universal applicability is seen as doubtful.[3] The 1.5 sigma shift has also become contentious because it results in stated "sigma levels" that reflect short-term rather than long-term performance: a process that has long-term defect levels corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance is, by Six Sigma convention, described as a "6 sigma process."[8] [27] The accepted Six Sigma scoring system thus cannot be equated to actual normal distribution probabilities for the stated number of standard deviations, and this has been a key bone of contention about how Six Sigma measures are defined.[27] The fact that it

Six Sigma is rarely explained that a "6 sigma" process will have long-term defect rates corresponding to 4.5 sigma performance rather than actual 6 sigma performance has led several commentators to express the opinion that Six Sigma is a confidence trick.[8]


[1] "The Inventors of Six Sigma" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20051106025733/ http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3079,00. html). Archived from the original (http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3079,00. html) on November 6, 2005. . Retrieved January 29, 2006. [2] Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=O6276jidG3IC& printsec=frontcover#PPA6,M1). Gower Publishing, Ltd.. p. 6. ISBN 0566083744. . [3] Antony, Jiju. "Pros and cons of Six Sigma: an academic perspective" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20080723015058/ http:/ / www. onesixsigma. com/ node/ 7630). Archived from the original (http:/ / www. onesixsigma. com/ node/ 7630) on July 23, 2008. . Retrieved August 5, 2010. [4] "Motorola University - What is Six Sigma?" (http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3088,00. html). . Retrieved 2009-09-14. "[...] Six Sigma started as a defect reduction effort in manufacturing and was then applied to other business processes for the same purpose." [5] Stamatis, D. H. (2004). Six Sigma Fundamentals: A Complete Guide to the System, Methods, and Tools. New York, New York: Productivity Press. p. 1. ISBN 9781563272929. OCLC 52775178. "The practitioner of the six sigma methodology in any organization should expect to see the use of old and established tools and approaches in the pursuit of continual improvement and customer satisfaction. So much so that even TQM (total quality management) is revisited as a foundation of some of the approaches. In fact, one may define six sigma as "TQM on steroids."" [6] Montgomery, Douglas C. (2009). Statistical Quality Control: A Modern Introduction (6 ed.). Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. p. 23. ISBN 9780470233979. OCLC 244727396. "During the 1950s and 1960s programs such as Zero Defects and Value Engineering abounded, but they had little impact on quality and productivity improvement. During the heyday of TQM in the 1980s, another popular program was the Quality Is Free initiative, in which management worked on identifying the cost of quality..." [7] "Motorola University Six Sigma Dictionary" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20060128110005/ http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3074-5804,00. html#ss). Archived from the original (http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3074-5804,00. html#ss) on January 28, 2006. . Retrieved January 29, 2006. [8] Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=O6276jidG3IC& printsec=frontcover#PPA25,M1). Gower Publishing, Ltd.. pp. 25. ISBN 0566083744. . [9] "Motorola Inc. - Motorola University" (http:/ / www. motorola. com/ motorolauniversity). . Retrieved January 29, 2006. [10] "About Motorola University" (http:/ / web. archive. org/ web/ 20051222081924/ http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3071-5801,00. html). Archived from the original (http:/ / www. motorola. com/ content/ 0,,3071-5801,00. html) on December 22, 2005. . Retrieved January 29, 2006. [11] "Six Sigma: Where is it now?" (http:/ / scm. ncsu. edu/ public/ facts/ facs030624. html). . Retrieved May 22, 2008. [12] De Feo, Joseph A.; Barnard, William (2005). JURAN Institute's Six Sigma Breakthrough and Beyond - Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. ISBN 0-07-059881-9. [13] Harry, Mikel; Schroeder, Richard (2000). Six Sigma. Random House, Inc. ISBN 0-385-49437-8. [14] "Institute of Industrial Engineers Six Sigma certifications" (http:/ / www. iienet2. org/ Seminars/ SeminarGroup. aspx?id=12936& seminar=6SC& grp=ICP). Norcross, Georgia: Institute of Industrial Engineers. . Retrieved 2010-01-05. [15] "Certification - ASQ" (http:/ / www. asq. org/ certification/ index. html). Milwaukee, Wisconsin: American Society for Quality. . Retrieved 2010-01-05. [16] Harry, Mikel J. (1988). The Nature of six sigma quality. Rolling Meadows, Illinois: Motorola University Press. p. 25. ISBN 9781569460092. [17] Gygi, Craig; DeCarlo, Neil; Williams, Bruce (2005). Six Sigma for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing, Inc.. pp. Front inside cover, 23. ISBN 0-7645-6798-5. [18] El-Haik, Basem; Suh, Nam P.. Axiomatic Quality. John Wiley and Sons. p. 10. ISBN 9780471682738. [19] Dirk Dusharme, "Six Sigma Survey: Breaking Through the Six Sigma Hype" (http:/ / www. qualitydigest. com/ nov01/ html/ sixsigmaarticle. html), Quality Digest [20] Paton, Scott M. (August 2002). Juran: A Lifetime of Quality (http:/ / www. qualitydigest. com/ aug02/ articles/ 01_article. shtml). 22. pp. 19–23. . Retrieved 2009-04-01. [21] Morris, Betsy (2006-07-11). "Tearing up the Jack Welch playbook" (http:/ / money. cnn. com/ 2006/ 07/ 10/ magazines/ fortune/ rule4. fortune/ index. htm). Fortune. . Retrieved 2006-11-26. [22] Richardson, Karen (2007-01-07). "The 'Six Sigma' Factor for Home Depot" (http:/ / online. wsj. com/ article/ SB116787666577566679. html). Wall Street Journal Online. . Retrieved October 15, 2007. [23] Ficalora, Joe; Costello, Joe. "Wall Street Journal SBTI Rebuttal" (http:/ / www. sbtionline. com/ files/ Wall_Street_Journal_SBTI_Rebuttal. pdf) (PDF). Sigma Breakthrough Technologies, Inc.. . Retrieved October 15, 2007. [24] Hindo, Brian (6 June 2007). "At 3M, a struggle between efficiency and creativity" (http:/ / www. businessweek. com/ magazine/ content/ 07_24/ b4038406. htm?chan=top+ news_top+ news+ index_best+ of+ bw). Business Week. . Retrieved June 6, 2007.

Six Sigma
[25] Ruffa, Stephen A. (2008). Going Lean: How the Best Companies Apply Lean Manufacturing Principles to Shatter Uncertainty, Drive Innovation, and Maximize Profits (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=_Q7OGDd61hkC). AMACOM (a division of American Management Association). ISBN 0-8144-1057-X. . [26] Wheeler, Donald J. (2004). The Six Sigma Practitioner's Guide to Data Analysis. SPC Press. p. 307. ISBN 9780945320623. [27] *Pande, Peter S.; Neuman, Robert P.; Cavanagh, Roland R. (2001). The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance (http:/ / books. google. com/ ?id=ybOuvzvcqTAC& pg=PA229& lpg=PA229& dq="key+ bones+ of+ contention+ amongst+ the+ statistical+ experts+ about+ how+ Six+ Sigma+ measures+ are+ defined"). New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. p. 229. ISBN 0071358064. .


Further reading
• Adams, Cary W.; Gupta, Praveen; Charles E. Wilson (2003). Six Sigma Deployment (http://books.google.com/ ?id=0lY_bhMBzLwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Adams+Gupta). Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. ISBN 0750675233. • Breyfogle, Forrest W. III (1999). Implementing Six Sigma: Smarter Solutions Using Statistical Methods (http:// books.google.com/?id=leQvoUXM9L0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Breyfogle+Implementing). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0471265721. • De Feo, Joseph A.; Barnard, William (2005). JURAN Institute's Six Sigma Breakthrough and Beyond - Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods (http://books.google.com/?id=0VHaTb6LJ4QC&printsec=frontcover& dq="six+sigma"). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional. ISBN 0071422277. • Hahn, G. J., Hill, W. J., Hoerl, R. W. and Zinkgraf, S. A. (1999) The Impact of Six Sigma Improvement-A Glimpse into the Future of Statistics, The American Statistician, Vol. 53, No. 3, pp. 208–215. • Harry, Mikel J.; Schroeder, Richard (1999). Six Sigma: The Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations (http://books.google.com/?id=FOHKAQAACAAJ&dq=Harry+Schroeder+ Sigma). New York, NY: Doubleday. ISBN 0385494378. • Keller, Paul A. (2001). Six Sigma Deployment: A Guide for Implementing Six Sigma in Your Organization (http:// books.google.com/?id=izjUAAAACAAJ&dq=Keller+Six+Sigma). Tucson, AZ: Quality Publishing. ISBN 0930011848. • Pande, Peter S.; Neuman, Robert P.; Roland R. Cavanagh (2001). The Six Sigma Way: How GE, Motorola, and Other Top Companies are Honing Their Performance (http://books.google.com/?id=ybOuvzvcqTAC& pg=PP1&dq=Pande+Six+Sigma+Way). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Professional. ISBN 0071358064. • Pyzdek, Thomas and Paul A. Keller (2009). The Six Sigma Handbook, Third Edition (http://books.google.com/ ?id=5CCcw4j2gkgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Pyzdek+Six+Sigma&q=). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0071623388. • Snee, Ronald D.; Hoerl, Roger W. (2002). Leading Six Sigma: A Step-by-Step Guide Based on Experience with GE and Other Six Sigma Companies (http://books.google.com/?id=_BRYIS31iwUC&printsec=frontcover& dq=Snee+Hoerl). Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press. ISBN 0130084573. • Taylor, Gerald (2008). Lean Six Sigma Service Excellence: A Guide to Green Belt Certification and Bottom Line Improvement (http://books.google.com/?id=1VdYNwAACAAJ&dq). New York, NY: J. Ross Publishing. ISBN 978-1604270068. • Tennant, Geoff (2001). SIX SIGMA: SPC and TQM in Manufacturing and Services (http://books.google.com/ ?id=O6276jidG3IC&printsec=frontcover#PPP1,M1). Aldershot, UK: Gower Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 0566083744.

Article Sources and Contributors


Article Sources and Contributors
Lean Government  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=389642128  Contributors: Bachrach44, Corollo12, Dr Gangrene, JiFish, Kusunose, Lmbstl, Minnaert, Neutrality, Rbjameson, Ronz, Scrate, THMcMahonIDOM, Timothy J Larson, Tom.derosa, Wikitawe, 8 anonymous edits United States Environmental Protection Agency  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=401205387  Contributors: 1995hoo, 1exec1, 306E, ADNghiem501, AEMoreira042281, AJB, AMAPO, Accurizer, Adambiswanger1, Aervanath, Ahoerstemeier, Aiyda, Al Lemos, Alan Liefting, Alansohn, Alfadog, Ali, All Is One, Andonic, Andre Engels, Antandrus, Apokrif, Ark'ay, AutoGeek, Back ache, Badagnani, Barek, Bdc101, Bearian, Beland, Belmont Stakes, Biblegirl88, Bikeable, Biztalkguy, Blackyoga, Blah28948, Bobblewik, Bobo192, BramvR, Bryan Derksen, Bud08, Buster2058, Calabraxthis, Calmer Waters, Can't sleep, clown will eat me, Cander0000, CapitalR, Capricorn42, CatsClaw, Ce4all, Cgingold, ChicagoJason, Chivista, Chowbok, Cje, Clawson, Cmcnicoll, Comp25, Conman015.5, Connormah, Coolcaesar, Courcelles, Creidieki, Crenner, Csi3199guy, DBrnstn, DMG413, DabMachine, Dakada, DanMS, DavidLevinson, Davodd, DerHexer, Docbrazen, Donreed, Dreish, Dubc0724, EPA 2007, EagleFan, Eastlaw, Ed Poor, ElationAviation, Emvl nesc, Epbr123, Epolk, Eric De Cola, Eric-Wester, Eso si que es, Ewlyahoocom, Excirial, Facts707, Farras Octara, Favonian, Fieldday-sunday, Figmillenium, FordPrefect42, Fram, Frtruth, GB fan, Gegorg, Gershwinrb, Glenfarclas, GoOdCoNtEnT, Gralo, Greentur, Ground Zero, Gurch, HTA, Halgin, Hard Raspy Sci, Hardtofindaname, HeadCaptain, Hereherer, Heron, Hydrargyrum, Iamunknown, Ike9898, ImperfectlyInformed, Inwind, IronGargoyle, J.delanoy, JPMcGrath, Ja 62, JaGa, JamesMLane, Jeandré du Toit, JeremyA, Jerome Charles Potts, Jewbaccaforev, Jgayoso-GMU, Jlhcpa, Jmchuff, John Broughton, John254, Johnpseudo, Johnskate17, Jorgesaipeter, Josh Parris, Jrjmd79, Kathleen.wright5, Kbdank71, Keiyakins, KelleyCook, KeptSouth, KieferSkunk, Kingpin13, Kingturtle, Kjglasch, KuroiShiroi, Lack Thereof, Lamb99, Lankiveil, Leuko, Lexor, Liftarn, Lightmouse, Lotje, MSTCrow, Mac, Markaci, Markisgreen, Markltownsend, Marsteller, Martin451, Maxis ftw, Mbeychok, Mcbfarm, Meco, Meredov, Michał Sobkowski, Mike9915, Mikemoral, Minesweeper, MisterHand, Mkevlar, Mmagdalene722, Mmccalpin, Moreau1, Mulad, Mus Musculus, Mwarren us, Natural RX, Neutrality, NewMachine, Noisedoes1, Nopetro, Novangelis, Nukeless, Nuttyturnip, Ocatecir, Odie5533, Owenca, Ozdaren, PDH, PKn, PPEpro, Paintjob, Parister, Parsecboy, PaulHanson, Pauly04, PeqEmpr, Pesco, Phaethon 0130, PhilHibbs, Piano non troppo, Pikiwyn, Pizza1512, Postdlf, Pps, Promethean, RadioFan2 (usurped), Random account 47, Razorflame, Razzamellon, Rchertzy, Rdavi404, Remi0o, Requestion, Res2216firestar, Reywas92, Rich Farmbrough, Richardhuffine, Rjwilmsi, Rlhuffine, Rlr3, Rmauger, Rockfang, RoswellAliens, Rrius, Ryanjunk, SGGH, Sam8, Sanjour, Sardanaphalus, Savidan, Sbtrocks, Scientus, ScottMainwaring, SeanO, Seann610, Seba5618, Seth Goldin, Shoefly, Shootbamboo, SidP, Sikelianos, Simesa, Skunkboy74, SkyWalker, Slatham100, Sm8900, SomeStranger, Soundthebugle, Spiffy sperry, Spongesquid, Squids and Chips, Ssilvers, StaticGull, Stemonitis, Stephenb, Steve Kubby, Stevey7788, Student7, Svick, Swithrow2546, Tandj1216, Tedickey, Thatguyflint, The Epopt, The Transhumanist, Themfromspace, Thewinchester, Tholly, Thunderstix, Tide rolls, Tiptoety, Tommy2010, Towerman, Trekphiler, Twsx, Tyberiuswp, Typ932, UBeR, Uspastpresentwatch, Velella, Versus22, Victor D, Vortexrealm, Vsmith, WCFrancis, Walshga, Waterthedog, Wavelength, Wdfarmer, Web499, Wfaulk, Wham Bam Rock II, Wik, Wiki alf, Wiki wiki1, WikiLaurent, Wing Nut, Woohookitty, Wslack, Xania, Yettie0711, Yilloslime, Zap Rowsdower, ΙωάννηςΚαραμήτρος, 485 anonymous edits Kaizen  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=401110725  Contributors: 4johnny, AHMartin, Aaronbrick, Abievelez, Aeronauticus, Aetheling, Alvestrand, Andy Dingley, Anon004, Astralblue, Authenticoach, Axc0pui, BBird, Beatnick, Beland, Bingobangobongoboo, BjKa, Brenont, Bueller 007, Calvin 1998, Cekli829, Cesare22, Cgy01, Chaithanya.krishnan, Chandru180, Clarkefreak, Connormc, Cornellk, Cverlinden, Cxbrx, Cybercobra, D, DCDuring, DMG413, Daniel J. Leivick, Davepamn, DavidLevinson, Deangano, Deltawing1, Denihilonihil, Devilgate, Digemedi, Djurakg, Dr Jonx, DrPW, Drmies, Dysprosia, Eataubm, Egged, Ehn, Ehusman, Elvenscout742, Elwikipedista, Errfixer, Espoo, Everything counts, Excirial, FWBOarticle, Fabykot, Facius, FernandoCela, Fl, Func, Fvw, Gdiner, Geyser99, Gruessle, Gthb, Heroeswithmetaphors, Hooverbag, Hramwiki, Hu12, Icesurfer, Impi, Ixfd64, JRSpriggs, JUNPRADO, JWB, Jadeddissonance, Jaganath, Jamesmorrison, Jasonjbridger, Jbillh, JoeSmack, Jooliper, Jordo ex, JosephGarcia03, Jsan, Julio Santos Monteiro, Kaizenqueen, Karn-b, Kdys, Kendrick7, Kent37, Kuru, Leaders100, Linmhall, Logan, Lucianop, Lundbird, M.e, Madhero88, Mallowb, Manuel Anastácio, Mark UK, MarkBruns, Martarius, MattB242, Mdd, MementoVivere, Meyerkl, Mig77, MightyWarrior, Miguel.lima, Mike Rosoft, Mike Schwartz, Mkoval, Mlewan, Morio, Mramsey68, Mthibault, Mutimanwar, Mwilson22, Nad, Nbarth, Nealcardwell, Neilc, Nelson50, Neutrality, NewEnglandYankee, Night Gyr, Nohat, Notmart, Nposs, Nsigniacorp, OEEGuru, Obelixus, Ohnoitsjamie, Oxymoron83, Paine Ellsworth, Pearle, Phe, Phillingham, Pi, Pickingapples, Pinkadelica, Ponydepression, PosPosPo, Pswift, RHaworth, Remuel, Rich Farmbrough, Richard Stone, Rjwilmsi, Rmptls, Ronz, Rowan Moore, Ryan Norton, Rzelnik, Saberwyn, Saga City, Saibo, Sam Korn, Scoops, Sekicho, Shanes, Shivayuga, Sjakkalle, Skomorokh, Smaines, Smalkin1, Spalding, Ssfguy, Statsone, Stelio, Stevebritgimp, Stumps, Subhasreddy, Sufiya24, The Thing That Should Not Be, TheoTheThinker, Theone00, ThurnerRupert, Timwalkerjr, Tkpowell, Tokek, Totalhealthtraining, Trisampson, Turnbull.mgmt, Ugur Basak, Ukpremier, Uncle G, Unregistered.coward, Vamaro, VampWillow, Vipinhari, Vishalk85, VsevolodKrolikov, Waveology, WhatamIdoing, WhisperToMe, Wikid77, Wilhkar, William Pietri, Wissons, Woobin, Woohookitty, Xagent86, Xezbeth, 401 anonymous edits Lean manufacturing  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=401155781  Contributors: 0tto, 2aprilboy, ALR, Abhijitsathe, AbsolutDan, Accounting4Taste, Alanmossman, Alansohn, Alexnicholls, Alleganywiki, Atlantic777, Auric, BBird, BMaskell, Balloonguy, Beauvallet, Beetstra, Bigalgot, Bill Levinson, Billtubbs, Bingobangobongoboo, Bisco, Bobblewik, Bobteapot, Bryan Derksen, Butcherdwayne, C Lazerick, Capricorn42, Cesare22, Charles T. Betz, Chris 42, Chris 73, Chris Murphy, Chris9674, ChristianEdwardGruber, Closedmouth, Coehmigen, Cometstyles, Cp111, Craig.larman, Crinoidgirl, Cst17, Customlean, Cutler, Cyclonerunner, DCwom, DanielPenfield, Darp-a-parp, DavidChao, Deipnosophista, Dicklyon, Download, Drhaggis, Drilnoth, Duk, Dwachter, Dwmann, Dyson1, Eataubm, Edward, Ehusman, Eleusis, Elipatwood, Eliyak, Enigma2006, Erianna, Eric76, Euchiasmus, Excirial, Exprexxo, Fabykot, Facius, Fish and karate, Fivemack, Folajimi, Furrykef, Garglebutt, Geoff Plourde, Gioto, Gorgalore, Grabchuk Andrij, Granite07, Hardyplants, Harryboyles, Heimis90, Heners, Heron, Hospiracr, I already forgot, Ideasintoaction, Indon, Irishguy, Ironwolf, Iwjnichol, J04n, Jbergquist, Jbillh, Jc4p, Jctchan, Jensgb, Jessicahullman, Jheuristic, Jikybebna, Joe.woelfle, Jooler, Jose Icaza, Journalist procesverb, Jpatram, Jpeeling, Jschmidt163, Jsnelson, Juanscott, JzG, Karthikvinay, Khatru2, Kienleong, Kjtobo, KnightRider, Kojotw, Kozuch, Kruckas, Kukini, Kuru, L.manufacturing, LeadSongDog, LeanInsider, Leanadvisors, LindaDavey, Llocklee, Lssacademy, Lycurgus, MER-C, Makawity, Manop, Manscher, Marc T Smith, Marceladevivo, Marcelo1229, Maurreen, Mausy5043, Mdd, Meganlaw15, MementoVivere, Meridies, MetellusScipio, Meyerkl, Mgc0wiki, Mgraban, Mh007, MiNombreDeGuerra, Michel Baudin, Mig77, Mild Bill Hiccup, Mistercupcake, Mkoval, Mktadmin, Mmoyer, Mortense, MrOllie, Mydogategodshat, Mysterychopper3027, Nabiw1, Nalyd357, Nasanine, Nelson50, Netalarm, NickPenguin, Nickj, Nitech2008, Njathind, Nkaufman, Nkeating, OEEGuru, Oberiko, Onorem, Oracleconnect, Orangerider, Paddyclyde, Pafi, Paul A, Paul Aster, Phil Bridger, Philip Trueman, Philmat, Piano non troppo, PietroSavo, RHaworth, RJFJR, Ravi Achanta, RedJ 17, Reinyday, Res2216firestar, RexNL, Rich Farmbrough, Richard Stone, Rjwilmsi, Rmptls, Rob Cranfill, Robertlo9, Ronz, Rory096, Royalguard11, Rredmond, S, S2000magician, SDC, ST47, SalvadorRodriguez, Sango123, Satori Son, Scientizzle, Scientus, Scioperati, Shadowjams, Sharkface217, Silverpop81, Snowolf, Sonneborn, Spangineer, Srobert01, Stickee, Student1980, Stumps, Sudfa, Sundarram s, Suruena, Symington, Symphony Girl, Tashambrown, Tassedethe, Thai.nguyen@stage-gate.com, Thaisk, That Guy, From That Show!, The Parsnip!, The Thing That Should Not Be, The undertow, TheMaskedImprover, Three-quarter-ten, Tim2wp, Tintenfischlein, Toddwill, Tommy2010, Toolingu, Trashbag, TreasuryTag, Turidoth, Turnbull.mgmt, Tvinson, VGarner, VSather, Vamaro, Veinor, VictorianMutant, Voyagerfan5761, Waldoemerson, WallyKlatch, Wavelength, Waveofthefuture, Whatswiki, Wik, WikiDan61, Wikicomments, Wikitawe, Wilson44691, Woohookitty, WriterHound, Xnuala, Xsmith, Xvani, Yauhey, Yorrose, Zsinj, ケゼペル, 551 anonymous edits Six Sigma  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=401517756  Contributors: *drew, 21655, 31stCenturyMatt, A2a2a2, Aandu, AbsolutDan, Academic Challenger, Aeon1006, Aetheling, Alai, Alfpooh, Altenmann, Alvarezking, Andradef, AndriuZ, Anomalocaris, Apostrophe, Apus, Aquraishi, ArthurAdams, Arun vvv, Awakeforever, BBird, Badgernet, BanyanTree, Barek, Bbpen, BenFrantzDale, BezLocu, Bggoldie, Bklynpoet, BlaiseFEgan, Bobdc, Bobo192, Bogey97, Bparekh99, Brainmeasures, Brick Thrower, Brighterorange, Brudolph1211, Bryan Derksen, Burpelson AFB, Buzzbeebara, CSumit, Caiaffa, Calvin 1998, Calvinballing, CanadianLinuxUser, Cask05, Catgut, Catradar, Cernen, Ceyockey, Cgayner, Cgburger, Cheftarashetty, Chris9674, ChrisCork, Closedmouth, Coffmanesq, Cpimbb, Cquels, Craigwb, Craigwbrown, Cst17, Ctbolt, Cybercobra, D.c.camero, DH85868993, DMCer, DanSchatz, Dandrake, DanielPenfield, Dave8057, David Haslam, David.mansfield, Davodd, Dcoetzee, Deangano, Decltype, DeeMusil, Deepak D'Souza, Deiz, Denton, Dermeister, Deusnoctum, Dfrg.msc, Dgray xplane, Dhollm, Dicklyon, Dleonard55, DocWatson42, Doulos Christos, Dpbsmith, Dr zoidberg590, Dragonbeast, Dreamster4, Drew R. Smith, Dvc214, Dwayne, Dylankhoolim, Dyson1, ESkog, Eastmain, Ed Poor, Eddy4294, Edgar181, Eduthie, Egeller, Elwikipedista, Enchanter, Epbr123, Erechtheus, Eric Kvaalen, Ernst.schnell, EsonLinji, Examplecg, Excirial, Exprexxo, Facius, Faradayplank, Fastily, Femto, FeralTitan, Finalnight, Finlay McWalter, Fish and karate, Flubbit, Fragglet, Frank LaFrazia, Frebo3, Funandtrvl, Gail, Gaius Cornelius, Gargoyle888, Gary King, Gateway0602, Gcjb, Germxorginal, Gerry Ashton, Giraffedata, Gloriamarie, Gmtress, Goalqpc, Gogo Dodo, Gold Paperclip, Goskan, Greglocock, GregorB, Grstain, Gurudatt, Hdam59, Heman, Hmoul, Horia.S, Howdiedoodie, Hu12, Huesing, HyperTransparency, ISixSigma, IW.HG, Ibbn, Ike9898, Imaninjapirate, Immunize, Ion, Ipazos, Irfan5, Isilanes, Isnow, Iterator12n, Its38, Iwjnichol, Ixfd64, J.delanoy, JForget, James086, Jaranda, Jayden54, Jayen466, Jblaze0, Jcardinal, Jcrager, Jctchan, Jerryseinfeld, JethroElfman, Jhamez84, Jheuristic, JimmB, Jnoguera, Joaopernes, JoeMarfice, Joeinwap, JohnEBredehoft, JohnN66, Jonathan thalberg, Joshuarobertsteiner, Journalist procesverb, Jp314159, Jpfulton, Judae1, K1Bond007, KMcD, Kevinh7777, Khalid, Khaosworks, KimBecker, Kirrages, Kjtobo, Ksuryan, Kulbhushanamit, Kumarsenthil, Kuru, La Pianista, Lamro, Leanadvisors, Leaner123, Leeked, Leigh, Leonius, LibLord, Lightspeedc, Lindigo, Llh, LnCnslt, Loren.wilton, Lostintherush, Luckiesdaidai, MZMcBride, Madir, MalwareSmarts, Manop, Marc T Smith, Mark Asread, MarkSweep, MarkThomas, Martin451, Mastahnke, MathGeek06, MatheoDJ, Matthew Stannard, Matthew Yeager, MauraBuxton, Maurreen, McSly, Mcgrof, Mcorazao, Mdd4696, Mdjain, Mdorohovich, Mephistophelian, MiNombreDeGuerra, Michael Hardy, Miker@sundialservices.com, MikeyChalupa, Miller17CU94, Mindmatrix, Minna Sora no Shita, Mlewan, Mmoitzh, Modest Genius, Moonriddengirl, Mouni1983, MrOllie, Mugunth Kumar, Mydogategodshat, N5iln, Nabiw1, Namazu-tron, Naveeniyerkn, Nbarth, Nbraver100, Nelson50, Nemhun, Netwerk14, Nichalp, NicholasTurnbull, Nicolasdz, Nilakanta srinivasan, Nimrand, Nohope, Nrabinowitz, OEEGuru, OM, Obsidian-fox, Oh Snap, Olff, Oregina, Ozone77, Paddles, Parvez1, PaulHanson, Pavankks, Paxsimius, Peaceduck, Pgk, Phamtran, Phil Boswell, PhilipR, Pikiwyn, Plastikspork, Pm master, Pmsyyz, Pol098, Polkdots, Poppy, Pratheepps, Priyatu, Project mosaic, Proofreader77, Psiphiorg, Pvosta, Pyroxene, Qbrook, Qualitytimes, Rachitawasthi, Rama's Arrow, Raman.puthiyedath, Ranicol, RaseaC, Raven4x4x, Ravensfan5252, Rednblu, Regardne, Reinyday, RexNL, Rfsmit, Rhdv, Rich Farmbrough, RichardF, RichardVeryard, Rjwilmsi, Rlsheehan, Rmelnyck, Rmptls, Robinh, Roderick A Munro, Roderickmunro, Rogerd, Ronz, Rootsie, RoyBoy, Rupertb, S Roper, S2000magician, SE7, SNIyer12, Salgueiro, Sander123, Sanjayaksaxena, Satoriforever, Savidan, Scarian, Sebokmike, Seqsea, Shadowlynk, Shaul1, Shawnc, Shenme, Sigmundur, Sixsigmais, Skillshouse, Skylined69, Slammer111, Slashme, Slocum1946, Snowded, SoCalSuperEagle, Soarhead77, Sobreira, Sonneborn, Sophie Smiles, Sophus Bie, Soumyadeeplodh, SpacemanSpiff, Spalding, Spangineer, Springnuts, Srobert01, Stephenh, Stevey7788, Stifle, Stor, SueHay, Sydneydoc, TC Black Belt, Tapir Terrific, Tessering, Thanhdieu, That Guy, From That Show!, The Anome, The Letter J, The undertow, The wub, Theda, Thequality, Thingg, Tiptoety, Tomhubbard, Tommy2010, TomyDuby, Tregoweth, Triona, Tripathimanish, TucsonTom, Tyomitch, Ukpremier, Uleepera, UtterUser, VCJv, VGarner, Vamaro, VanPeel, Veinor, Versus22, Vjmickelson, Vrenator, Vspaceg, Waharry, Wdfarmer, Weregerbil, Wiki3 1415, Wikid77, Will Beback, Winterst, Wtmitchell, Xsmith,

Article Sources and Contributors
Yak99, Yeokaiwei, Zedla, Zepheus, Zfang, 1206 anonymous edits


Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors


Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors
file:Environmental Protection Agency logo.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Environmental_Protection_Agency_logo.svg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Awg1010, Clindberg, Cpicon92, Giggy, Mattes, Rocket000, Vipersnake151, 1 anonymous edits Image:Epaheadquarters.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Epaheadquarters.jpg  License: GNU Free Documentation License  Contributors: Original uploader was Coolcaesar at en.wikipedia Image:Regions of the United States EPA.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Regions_of_the_United_States_EPA.svg  License: GNU Free Documentation License  Contributors: User:Ninjatacoshell, User:Theshibboleth File:OSV Bold.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:OSV_Bold.jpg  License: GNU Free Documentation License  Contributors: Rtphokie (talk). Original uploader was RadioFan at en.wikipedia Image:EPA WTC 2001-10-10.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:EPA_WTC_2001-10-10.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Photo by Mike Rieger/ FEMA News Photo Image:Williamruckelshaus.jpeg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Williamruckelshaus.jpeg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Nachcommonsverschieber Image:Russell train.gif  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Russell_train.gif  License: Public Domain  Contributors: US EPA Image:Doug M. Costle official EPA portrait.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Doug_M._Costle_official_EPA_portrait.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Environmental Protection Agency Image:Anne M. Gorsuch 1982b.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Anne_M._Gorsuch_1982b.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Environmental Protection Agency of U.S.. Original uploader was W E Hill at en.wikipedia Image:Lee m thomas 2008.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Lee_m_thomas_2008.jpg  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0  Contributors: User:Mrod411 Image:William K. Reilly EPA.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:William_K._Reilly_EPA.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: from a U.S. federal government source Image:CarolBrownerCirca1996.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:CarolBrownerCirca1996.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Unknown, but used by EPA as part of a series of formal portraits of their Administrators Image:WhitmanChristineTodd.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:WhitmanChristineTodd.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: EPA Image:Mike Leavitt.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mike_Leavitt.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: SoIssetEben!, Tom, Väsk, 5 anonymous edits Image:Stephen L. Johnson, official 2006 EPA photo.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Stephen_L._Johnson,_official_2006_EPA_photo.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Tom Image:Lisa P. Jackson official portrait.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Lisa_P._Jackson_official_portrait.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Eric Vance, EPA photographer Image:PDCA-Two-Cycles.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:PDCA-Two-Cycles.svg  License: Attribution  Contributors: User:Karn-b Image:Benjamin-Franklin-U.S.-$100-bill.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Benjamin-Franklin-U.S.-$100-bill.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: U.S. Government Image:Six sigma-2.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Six_sigma-2.svg  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.5  Contributors: User:Luxo Image:Factory.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Factory.svg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: User:Howcheng Image:6 Sigma Normal distribution.jpg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:6_Sigma_Normal_distribution.jpg  License: Public Domain  Contributors: Jayen466, Fleshgrinder Image:Xbar chart for a paired xbar and s chart.svg  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Xbar_chart_for_a_paired_xbar_and_s_chart.svg  License: Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0  Contributors: User:DanielPenfield



Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported http:/ / creativecommons. org/ licenses/ by-sa/ 3. 0/

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->