Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adoption of Six Sigma DMAIC To Reduce Cost of Poor Quality
Adoption of Six Sigma DMAIC To Reduce Cost of Poor Quality
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0401.htm
Adoption of Six
Adoption of Six Sigma DMAIC Sigma DMAIC
to reduce cost of poor quality
Anupama Prashar
IILM School of Higher Education, Gurgaon, India
103
Abstract Received 24 January 2013
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the systematic application of Six Sigma tools for Revised 24 January 2013
identification and reduction of cost of poor quality (COPQ). The study examines one of the chronic problems Accepted 25 January 2013
of failure of cooling fan assembly at repair division of a company dealing in helicopter components.
Design/methodology/approach – The case adopted Six Sigma Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-
Control (DMAIC) methodology to achieve the goal of reduction in COPQ.
Findings – After completing the Define, Measure and Analyze phase, it was found that use of extreme
tolerances and cross-fitment of bearings are the root cause of cooling fan assembly failure. The major
recommendations made during the Improve phase were to design a bearing matching software for
improving the cross-fitment of bearings and to procure a hydraulic jig with electronic jig instead of
manual jig. The value of implementing these recommended solutions equate to a saving of INR 34 lacs
per annum. Since it was a chronic problem, the company expects this to be a recurring saving.
Originality/value – This specific case exhibits the successful application of Six Sigma DMAIC
methodology in repair and maintenance for driving down the cost of failure and improved processes.
Keywords Six sigma, DMAIC, Rework, Pareto analysis, Cost of poor quality (COPQ),
Capability analysis, Process failure mode effect analysis (PFMEA), Cause and effect diagram,
Control chart, Chronic
Paper type Case study
1. Introduction
Today, organizations strive for an improved level of process capability and a reduced
level of cost of poor quality (COPQ). The bottom-line objective is to generate a
profitable margin and sustainable competitiveness in the market. COPQ is the cost
associated with poor quality of products and services. For a manufacturing company,
COPQ is the total cost of repair, rework, scrap, service calls, warranty claims and
write-offs from obsolete finished goods. The concept of COPQ connects the improvement
priorities of a company with its strategic objectives of achieving improved financial
performance and greater customer satisfaction. As per statistics, COPQ is o10 percent
of sales for companies who are at “Six Sigma” level, about 15 to 20 percent of sales
for companies who are at “four sigma” level and about 20 to 30 percent of sales for
companies who are at “three sigma” levels (Clark, 1999).
One of the well-known approaches to reduce COPQ is a project-based approach
based on Six Sigma DMAIC methodology (Kumar and Sosnoski, 2009). Six Sigma
DMAIC methodology, is used to improve already existing processes and had been
proven to be successful in reducing costs, improving cycle times, eliminating defects,
raising customer satisfaction and significantly increasing profitability in every
industry and many organizations worldwide (Tong et al., 2004). There are number of
studies which show the successful application of Six Sigma DMAIC methodology in International Journal of Productivity
automobile industry (Chen et al., 2005), small-scale enterprises (Sinthavalai, 2006; and Performance Management
Vol. 63 No. 1, 2014
Desai, 2006), manufacturing processes (Kumar et al., 2007; Li et al., 2008; Tong et al., pp. 103-126
2004; Kumar and Sosnoski, 2009) and services such as healthcare (Dreachslin and Lee, r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-0401
2007; Taner et al., 2007) and retail (Kumar et al., 2008). DOI 10.1108/IJPPM-01-2013-0018
IJPPM The basic statistical tools used in five phases of DMAIC methodology helps identify,
63,1 quantify and eliminate the root cause of waste or rejections and sustain the improved
performance of the production line with well-executed control plans in future (Desai
and Shrivastava, 2008). The goal is to stop the defects before they appear and reduce
the COPQ by adopting a predictive rather a reactive approach toward rejection
and rework.
104 The repair division of a company dealing in helicopter components based in India
was facing the challenge of high COPQ. The division was responsible for overhauling
of critical and technology intensive components of transport helicopter. The present
paper presents the case of a Six Sigma project as practiced in the repair division of the
referred company.
Purposes of this paper are:
. to describe the application of the Six Sigma DMAIC methodology for reducing
the rejection or rework (COPQ); and
. to report preliminary findings, and to examine conditions which contributed to
the successful implementation.
The remainder of the paper is laid down as follows: the first section briefly reviews
the literature on status and adoption of Six Sigma in a variety of context such as
manufacturing, healthcare, retailing, financial services, etc. The following sections
provide an overview of the five phases of the DMAIC methodology to provide a context
of the case study. The discussion of the implementation is concluded in the last section.
2. Literature review
Before taking up the case explanations, let us briefly review the studies that have
shown successful cases of Six Sigma DMAIC methodology applications in a variety
of contexts.
Cho et al. (2011) identified the key ingredients of Six Sigma based on a survey of
diverse sizes, industries and implementation phases of Korean companies using factor
analysis. Compared with other studies conducted by empirical methods, the survey
data for this study were statistically analyzed and the evaluation results were represented
as quantitative indicators.
Mohamed conducted an empirical survey to validate the effectiveness of the
most influential barriers to Six Sigma implementation in a developing country.
The study identified the soft impediments – knowledge and support, and hard
impediments – professionals and finance, as the most influential barriers to Six
Sigma implementation. The study found that decision makers and quality managers
should not waste their resources on overcoming all Six Sigma barriers since only
specific barriers significantly influence the Six Sigma implementation in relation
to dimensions of organizational factors.
Firka (2010) investigated the results of a study conducted by the Argentinean
Institute for Quality to determine the variables which influenced the evolution and
growth of Six Sigma methodology within a set of organizations. The study involved
a qualitative investigation of multiple cases through interviews with key players in
some organizations. The study found that there cannot be a “one size fits all” definition
of Six Sigma, particularly years after the initial deployment. The study highlighted the
need for specific ways by which Six Sigma core concepts can be consciously
incorporated in the organization through a planned path.
Tjahjono et al. (2010) identified the latest trends, approaches, tools and techniques, Adoption of Six
benefits and combinations of Six Sigma with other concepts by carrying out a Sigma DMAIC
systematic and thematic literature review. The study proposed four interpretations
of Six Sigma: first, a set of statistical tools, second, an operational philosophy of
management, third, a business culture and fourth, an analysis methodology. The study
emphasized that the main goals of Six Sigma implementation, i.e. improving efficiency,
profitability and capability in the process, remained unchanged. 105
Antony and Desai (2009) presented the results from an empirical investigation
of Six Sigma status in the Indian industry. The results of empirical study reflected the
reasons for application of Six Sigma by Indian organizations, the most and least
commonly used tools and techniques, critical success factors (CSFs) for the implementation
of Six Sigma, and common impediments in the implementation.
Kaushik and Khanduja (2008) applied Six Sigma DMAIC methodology to specific
case of thermal power plant for conservation of energy. They implemented Six Sigma
project recommendations to reduce the consumption of demineralized (DM) make-up
water from 0.90 to 0.54 percent of maximum continuous rating (MCR) resulting in a
comprehensive energy saving of INR 304.77 lacs per annum.
Krishna et al. (2008) presented a case study illustrating how a multinational Indian
corporation was able to successfully implement Six Sigma principles to improve its
operations. The study provides an assessment of the importance of Six Sigma strategy
in Indian manufacturing companies.
Kumar et al. (2008) presented a case of implementation of the Six Sigma DMAIC
approach for improvement in service system by a major consumer electronics and
appliance retailing company in the USA. The study used a combination of design
methods which included creating multiple service blueprints and implementing the Six
Sigma DMAIC approach. A Service Quality (SERVQUAL) Survey was conducted and
analyzed the data, to give an understanding of customer satisfaction with the service
provided at the company, compared to its major competitors. The service blueprint was
analyzed and strategies were recommended to improve the present system, with the
goal of providing better customer service and an improved shopping experience. With
the recommendations, an “improved service model” for the company was created
along with fail safe mechanisms to ensure that service guarantees will be met.
Li et al. (2008) presented a specific case on implementation of Six Sigma DMAIC
approach to improve the capability of the solder paste printing process by reducing
variations in thickness from a nominal value. The study adopted the DMAIC approach,
which included the Taguchi method to reduce the estimated standard deviation of
solder thickness from 13.69 to 6.04. In addition, the process capability index Cpk was
enhanced from 0.487 to 1.432.
Kumar and Sosnoski (2009) highlighted the potential of DMAIC Six Sigma in
realizing the cost savings and improved quality by using the case study of a leading
manufacturer of tooling. The study examined one of the chronic quality issues on shop
floor by utilizing Six Sigma tools. The study showed that DMAIC Six Sigma process
is an effective and novel approach for the machining and fabrication industries to
improve the quality of their processes and products and ensuring profitability by
driving down manufacturing costs.
Kumar et al. (2007) presented a case on application of Six Sigma DMAIC
problem-solving methodology to identify the parameters causing casting defects and
to control these parameters. The results of the study were based on the application of
tools and techniques in the DMAIC methodology, i.e. Pareto Analysis, measurement
IJPPM system analysis, regression analysis and design of experiment (DOE). The results
63,1 showed that the application of the Six Sigma methodology reduced casting
defects and increased the process capability of from 0.49 to 1.28. The application
of DMAIC resulted in a significant financial impact (over US$110,000 per annum)
on the bottom-line of the company.
Dreachslin and Lee (2007) presented a case on application of Six Sigma DMAIC
106 techniques in determining the effectiveness of diversity initiatives in healthcare
management in the USA. The authors inferred that Six Sigma and DMAIC can be
applied to diversity initiatives such as ameliorating racial and ethnic disparities in
healthcare, and recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce.
Taner et al. (2007) designed five case studies in healthcare to show the performance
improvement accomplished by Six Sigma DMAIC presenting a road-map for problem
solving and service/process improvement. The findings showed that the healthcare
organization gained a greater ability to address challenges across the system; maximized
resource utilization; reduced redundancies, waste and rework; diminished bottle-necks
related to scheduling; improved working conditions for healthcare personnel. The results
showed that healthcare organizations are able to increase their market share in the long
run after Six Sigma implementation.
Martins et al. (2006) carried out an action research in a Brazilian cosmetic factory
to identify the enablers and inhibitors of Six Sigma project. The study identified
that the main enablers were the continuous support of Six Sigma champion who
was the company’s CEO, different backgrounds of team members, involvement of
team members, team members’ knowledge of process, preliminary results which
provided a positive feedback, and the intensive presentation of results of project.
The inhibitors were found to be difficulty to collect data, uncertainty regarding the
project payoff, difficulty to carry out experiments interfering in the production
process, lack of previous production process map, and the difficulty to apprehend the
Control phase of DMAIC. Moreover, the existence of an interaction among some
those factors was evidenced.
Sinthavalai (2006) developed and evaluated a model for implementation of Six
Sigma in small manufacturing enterprises (SMEs). The study highlighted that SMEs
have limitations when employing the Six Sigma program due to the limited time, cost
and effort, and other barriers typical of an SME (e.g. organization culture, structure
and strategies). Therefore, SMEs need a different methodology to guide and facilitate
the implementation of Six Sigma. The study proposed self-learning web-based system
(e-learning systems) for employees in order to reduce the costs of hiring the consultancy
and training, which are the high investment costs in Six Sigma implementation.
Desai (2006) presented real-life case where Six Sigma has been successfully applied
at one of the Indian small-scale industries (SSI) to improve one of the core processes.
The studies reflected that SSI sectors are constantly on the alert to gain a competitive
edge, using the many tools and techniques that have long been flaunted as a way to
beat the competitions.
Chen et al. (2005) presented a case study in context of automobile industry in
Taiwan. The study used the DMAIC model of Six Sigma to measure the performance of
customer requirements by creating a questionnaire and analyzing the performance
of the product quality mechanism. The study used the key elements found in the
quality process as countermeasures for planning and improvement.
Hendry (2005) presented empirical evidence from 11 case study companies in
context of Asian industry to determine the issues associated with implementation
process of Six Sigma methodology and how it differs between manufacturing and Adoption of Six
service processes. The study found that while the Six Sigma phenomenon is generally Sigma DMAIC
perceived positively, Six Sigma is more appropriate for high risk, complicated, large
scale and cross-functional projects and its costs cannot be justified for smaller
projects. The evidence also suggested that Six Sigma is less successful if it is too
much geared toward shortsighted financial targets that do not have management
involvement. 107
Hensley and Dobie (2005) proposed a model for assessing the readiness for Six
Sigma in service organizations. The study identified two components of organizational
readiness: organizational experience with improvement programs and organizational
understanding of processes. The proposed model was applied in an urban public
transit company by using a survey. The results of the survey identified the perceptual
differences between customers and the organization which provided the basis for
the development of a process improvement program that employees should be able
to undertake.
McAdam and Evans (2004) examined the principles and practice used in the
implementation and operation of Six Sigma. The study critically evaluated the application
of Six Sigma in two sites and at four levels within a case organization. Both qualitative and
quantitative research data were used for an investigation of Six Sigma implementation
and deployment. Qualitative data took the form of in-depth interviews of the key Six
Sigma senior management personnel in both plants. The quantitative data were obtained
from questionnaires distributed to four levels and two sites in the organization.
Tong et al. (2004) designed a case on improvement on the sigma level of the
screening process, which is regarded as the most critical process in printed circuit
boards (PCB) manufacturing through the DMAIC approach. At the early stages,
process capability analysis (PCA) and statistical process control (SPC) were used to
measure and analyze the current printing performance of the screening machines.
During later stages, DOE was conducted to determine the optimal settings of the
critical to quality (CTQs) factors in the screening process. The study showed that by
using these optimal settings, Six Sigma performance can be achieved.
Goh and Xie (2004) presented an overview of the Six Sigma approach as it is taken
today, followed by a discussion on how this approach can be taken further to enhance
the competitiveness of organization. The study emphasized that in an increasingly
competitive and globalized environment, the traditional Six Sigma concept will be
outright irrelevant since in many situations “sigma levels” cannot be measured. The
study emphasized that a thriving, growing and winning organization cannot be
operating on the basis of error avoidance aspects such as imagination, vision,
leadership, passion and creativity. As per the study, these aspects are irrelevant to
the DMAIC straight jacket.
3. Case study
The case is about repair division of a company engaged in overhauling of
critical components of transport helicopters. The division was struggling with
a high COPQ. It identified three areas for improvement and based on Project
Prioritization Index (PPI) selected the project on reduction in failure of cooling fan
assembly (Table I).
A cooling fan is a vital sub-assembly of a helicopter and its function is to cool
down the lubricating oil of aero-engines and gearbox by forced circulation of the
ambient air. The division was repairing 80-90 cooling fan assembles in a year and
IJPPM Potential Cost to Probability of Time to
63,1 savings (INR) complete (INR) success complete (year)
PPI ¼
Projects S C P T (S/C) (P/T)
Reduction in cost
108 of flight test 2,000,000 350,000 0.7 0.5 8.00
Reduction on spurious
fire warning
in helicopter 1,600,000 200,000 0.8 0.75 8.53
Reduction in cooling fan
assembly failure 4,200,000 300,000 0.8 0.5 25.20a
Table I.
Project selection (PPI) Note: aHighest PPI (reduction in cooling fan assembly failure project)
the failure rate of cooling fan assembly at the testing phase was as high as 9 percent.
Thus, resulting in a COPQ (rework cost) of about INR 42 lacs per annum as shown in
Table II. This was the chronic problem for the company.
The division initiated a project in January 2011 with the aim of reducing this high
COPQ. A project team comprising of members of functions impacted by the project
implementation was formed. The team adopted project by project approach using Six
Sigma DMAIC methodology for solving the problem.
Blade cleaner
Prevented
with housing
impeller rubbing
110 (0.2 + 0.03 mm)
Reduce COPQ
Flow rate
(Failure of cooling Improved airflow
(4.85 + 0.25 m3/sec)
fan assembly)
Initial H/C
Cleaning Operators
Coating
Local Final
Consumables
Supplier Cleaning
Assembly
Figure 3.
High-level process
map or SIPOC Testing
done, impeller clearance between the cooling fan blades and the housing is checked
and if found ok, the cooling fan unit will be passed for final testing. In case, the
clearance is not within the specification limit, the assembly has to be dismantled
again and has to go through all the process as mentioned above. After the final testing,
if the assembly fails, it has to go through the similar procedures. After successful
testing, the cooling fan assembly is sent for preservation/packing and after proper
documentation, it is passed out to either operating unit/helicopter final assembly.
Data collection plan for CTQs. A data collection plan was formulated depicting
the data type, sample size, data collection method and responsibilities. Format used for
data collection is illustrated in Table III. Data collected using this plan are given
in Appendix 2.
Adoption of Six
Impeller
Dismantling Cleaning Assembly
check OK ? Sigma DMAIC
No
Yes
Receipt Viewing
Functional
Parts testing
Yes OK ? 111
START No
Parts
OK ? Test
No
OK ?
Micrometry Post-
Checks Yes Replace Micrometry Yes
Parts Packing/
Preservation
NDT Final
Cleaning
No Pass Out
Parts Electro-plating /
OK ? Anti-corrosive End
Yes
Figure 4.
Note: COPQ due to rework is detected in two stages mentioned above and are “As Is” process map
marked in red line in the diagram
Table III.
CTQ Operational definition Data type Size (each) How collected By whom Data collection plan
Capability analysis of CTQs. The capability analysis of the data on CTQs was done
using the Mini-Tab. For both the CTQ parameters namely impellor blade clearance (the
capability index, Cp ¼ 0.64, Cpk ¼ 0.53 which is o1.33) and flow rate (the capability
index, Cp ¼ 0.78 & Cpk ¼ 0.53 which is o1.33) the process was found to be incapable.
The capability plots are shown in Figure 5.
Base line sigma level. The present sigma levels were calculated for attribute CTQ
based on the following defect per million opportunities (DPMO) method (Benbow and
Kubiak, 2010).
DPMO ¼ Number of defects 106/number of opportunities number of units
Considering:
. number of units (cooling fan units assembled) ¼ 40;
. defect (fans with clearance beyond specification limits) ¼ 9; and
. opportunity(CTQ as arrived in Define phase) ¼ 3.
The baseline sigma for attribute CTQ was found to be 3.1.
IJPPM Between/Within Capability of Flow Rate
LSL USL
63,1 Process Data B/W
LSL 4.6 Overall
Target *
USL 5.1 B/W Capability
Sample Mean 4.76875 Cp 0.78
Sample N 40 CPL 0.53
SD(Between) 0 CPU 1.03
SD(Within) 0.106684 Cpk 0.53
112 SD(B/W)
SD(Overall)
0.106684
0.102961
Overall Capability
Pp 0.81
PPL 0.55
PPU 1.07
Ppk 0.55
Cpm *
3.1.3 Analyze phase. During this phase, the project team examined the measurements
collected in the Measure phase and sought explanations for the various readings by
using the following tools and techniques: brainstorming, cause and effect diagram,
Pareto analysis (Benbow and Kubiak, 2010).
Cause and effect diagram. The project team conducted brainstorming to identify
the probable cause of failure. In order to narrow down the focus, these causes were
categorized in different categories in the cause and effect diagram (Figure 6).
Pareto analysis. In order to prioritize the cause, the team plotted a Pareto chart using the
data collected for 31 rework cases during last four years (2006-2011) as shown in Figure 7.
Based on the results of Pareto analysis, the team selected the problem of “extreme
tolerances” and “wrong fitment” for the improvement phase.
Identifying key process input variables (KPIVs). The project team used above
mentioned causes as basis for further detailed analysis to identify the contributing
Impeller rubbing Adoption of Six
Use of extreme Sigma DMAIC
Loose tolerances
attachment
Play in
Wrong fitment bearing
on Test bed
Wrong fitment
Operator error 113
Failure of
Ineffective Cooling Fan
Wrong fitmentWrong Iubrication Damaged
Play in handling Reduced blade
bearing Wrong speed Bad profile
fan fitment of blade
Use of extreme Test rig
tolerances Non-adherence Ineffective
of SOPs faulty Figure 6.
cleaning
Cause and effect diagram
Spline damage Lesser air flow
100
30
Vital Few 90
25 80
Useful Many 70
Cum. Percent
20
60
Frequency
15 50
40
10 30
20
5
10
0 0
Extreme Wrong Bad profile Ineffective Test rig Wrong
tolerances Fitment of blade Iubrication faulty Handling
Frequency 21 4 2 2 1 1
Figure 7.
Percent 67.7 12.9 6.5 6.5 3.2 3.2 Pareto analysis
Cum. Frequency 67.7 80.6 87.1 93.5 96.8 100
factors for each major cause. The team identified five KPIVs for the cooling fan assembly
based on the know-how of process owners with the objective of funneling the input
variables to identify most critical inputs and measuring their performance. The KPIVs,
its type and specifications are given in Table IV.
The team prepared a KPIV Impact Matrix to analyze the impact of the KPIVs on the
performance of cooling fan assembly as shown in Table V.
The team collected data for KPIVs and performed capability analysis to study the
variation. Out of these five, the spread for two was found more, these were:
. inner diameter of bearing sleeve (Figure 8); and
. outer diameter of fan shaft (Figure 9).
Capability analysis for rest of KPIVs is attached as Appendix 3.
The root causes emerged out of the entire journey established the following root
causes contributing the failure of cooling fan assembly:
. use of extreme tolerance specifications; and
. cross-fitment of bearings.
3.1.4 Improve phase. This phase involves identification of possible solutions, their
implementation and verification of workability of the solutions (Benbow and Kubiak,
2010).
Identification of possible solutions. In order to find out the probable solutions,
the team brainstormed and constructed a counter measure matrix (Figure 10).
Between/Within Capability of Inner Diameter of Sleeve
LSL USL
Process Data B/W
LSL 60 Overall
Target *
USL 60.03 B/W Capability
Sample Mean 60.0186 Cp 0.65
Sample N 40 CPL 0.80
SD(Between) 0 CPU 0.50
SD(Within) 0.00769284 Cpk 0.50
SD(B/W) 0.00769284 Overall Capability
SD(Overall) 0.00742466 Pp 0.67
PPL 0.83
PPU 0.51
Ppk 0.51
Cpm *
Reduce Specification
tolerances
Extreme tolerance
Develop Bearing Matching
specifications of shaft
software
and bearings
Manual Matching of spares for
close tolerances
Cross fitment of
Training operator with existing jig
bearings
Figure 10.
Quenching shaft before fitment Counter measure matrix
IJPPM The team created an Impact/Effort Matrix for assessing the potential impact of
63,1 solutions against the estimated effort (Figure 11).
The following probable solutions emerged out of the Impact/Effort Matrix:
. creating a bearing matching software by utilizing the micrometry data;
. procuring an improved automated jig for fitment of bearings; and
116 . procuring an improved cleaning bath for effective cleaning.
A solution prioritization matrix was created on the basis of the criteria of: likely defect
reduction, time and cost of implementation, and likelihood of future complaints and
safety (Table VI).
5
Use of Bearing
Matching Software Reduce spec.
Improved tolerances
automated jig
4
Improved
cleaning bath
3
Impact
2 Quenching shaft
before fitment
Training operator
1 Manual matching
of spares
Figure 11.
Impact/effort matrix 0 1 2 3 4 5
Effort
Prioritization criterion
Likely defect Time to Cost to Future complaints
reduction (10) implement (6) implement (8) and safety (6)
Solutions Score w/score Score w/score Score w/score Score w/score Total (30)
1. Reduce spec. 9
tolerances 9 90 2 12 1 8 1 6 116 >
2. Use of bearing =
matching software 9 90 4 24 7 56 5 30 200
3. Manual matching >
;
spares 3 30 5 30 7 56 2 12 128
4. Improved
automated jig 8 80 4 24 5 40 5 30 174
5. Quenching of shaft 7 70 3 18 2 16 2 12 116
Table VI. 6. Training of operator 3 30 5 30 6 48 2 12 120
Solution prioritisation 7. Improved cleaning
matrix bath 7 70 4 24 4 32 4 24 150
Implementation of solutions. The following solutions were implemented for the Adoption of Six
improvement of reduction in failure of cooling fan assembly. Sigma DMAIC
Bearing matching software: for improving the cross-fitment of bearings, software
was created in MS Access using the micrometry data collected for warranty claims.
This software helped find the best matching bearing available in the bay depending
upon the shaft and sleeve number. A screenshot of the software is shown in Figure 12.
Hydraulic jig with electronic display: a hydraulic jig with electronic display was used 117
in place of manual jig with torque meter in order to improve the fitment of the bearing
(Figure 13).
Modified cleaning bath: a modified cleaning bath was procured in place of old bath
in order to improve cleaning of the spares.
Process failure mode effect analysis (PFMEA): the PFMEA of the process was
conducted for critical steps (micrometry, assembly, testing and packing/transport).
All the failure modes and its effect were identified, controls were planned and
RPN numbers of before and after controls were analyzed and the effectiveness after
implementing the improvements was assessed. It was observed that the RPN numbers
for all the key process activities were significantly reduced after implementation of the
solutions. The PFMEA is shown in Table VII.
The team prepared an implementation plan to implement the proposed solutions
(Table VIII).
Cost benefit analysis: a cost benefit analysis was carried by the team to compare the
cost incurred in the project vs the benefits achieved (Table IX).
After implementing the recommended process changes and actions, the following
results were achieved:
. An estimated saving of INR 3,834,100/-, by the reduction in COPQ for the
current year, was recorded. It is interesting to note that the cost incurred for
implementation of solutions was one-time in nature and hence the organization is
expected to gain full amount in future years.
Figure 12.
Bearing matching
software
IJPPM
63,1
118
Figure 13.
Hydraulic jig
Micrometry Wrong measure- Rubbing of 9 Instrument error 1 Supervisor checks 1 9 Periodic training 9 1 1 9
ment impeller Operator error QA checks
Damaged spline Data entry error Periodic
calibration
Assembly Wrong matching Rubbing of 9 Operator error 5 Supervisor checks 3 135 Bearing matching 9 1 2 18
Cross fitment impeller Wrong spares QA checks software
Damaged spline Use of extreme Automated jig
Lesser air flow tolerances Modified grease gun
Faulty jig and Training
fixtures
Testing Wrong results Lesser air flow 7 Ineffective 2 Supervisor checks 2 28 Improved cleaning 7 1 1 7
Rework cleaning QA checks bath
Test rig faulty Regular training
New operator Preventive maint
Packing/ Damage Damaged spline 8 Ineffective 4 Final check 2 48 Improved packaging 7 1 1 7
transport Damaged packing Training
bracket Careless New spline blanking
handling
Process failure mode effect
Adoption of Six
Sigma DMAIC
analysis (PFMEA)
Table VII.
119
IJPPM Plan Activity Responsibility Target date Completion date
63,1
Communication Develop and implement: In charge 20 April 15 April
plan Training needs Fan Bay
Communication needs
Resource plan Estimate manpower In charge 20 April 18 April
requirement Testing Bay
120 Identify resources
Develop job responsibility
Budget Develop cost benefit In charge 20 April 20 April
analysis Admin
Process Data collection plan In charge 20 April 20 April
implementation Amend work packages Assembly Bay
Pilot testing
Control plan Identify control measures In charge 30 April 30 April
Table VIII. Develop and implement Assembly Bay
Implementation plan control plan
Extreme tolerance specifications Use bearing matching software for Technical officer
of shaft and bearings assembly of bearings Supervisor
Incorporate in work package Operators
Training to operators
Control chart of bearing fitment
Ineffective cleaning Use of improved cleaning bath Technical officer
Incorporate in work package Supervisor
Training of operators Operators
Cross fitment of bearings Replace manual jig with improved Technical officer
and powered jig Supervisor
Table X. Incorporate in work package Operators
Control plan Training of operators
improvement projects were proposed and approved by the top management after
successful implementation of the present project. Involvement of leadership proved to
be the major success factor of the project. This project unfastened the path for a new
culture and shared aims in the company.
The Six Sigma DMAIC methodology is appropriate fit for the reduction in COPQ
in manufacturing processes such machining, fabrication, repair and maintenance,
I-MR Chart of Difference Between Outer Dias Adoption of Six
0.000 UCL = –0.000300 Sigma DMAIC
Individual Value
–0.002
–
–0.004 x = –0.003846
–0.006
LCL = –0.007392
121
–0.008
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Observation
UCL = 0.004356
0.004
Moving Range
0.003
0.002
MR = 0.001333
0.001
0.000 LCL = 0
Figure 14.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Control chart
Observation
supply chain, etc. (Kumar et al., 2007; Li et al., 2008; Tong et al., 2004; Kumar
and Sosnoski, 2009). This approach can benefit different industries for solving
quality-related problems. However, the companies will be most likely to succeed
if their top-level management is supportive of a continuous improvement culture.
Another key to success is to choose projects that can be measured and that
potentially have a good return on quality.
References
Antony, J. and Desai, D.A. (2009), “Assessing the status of Six Sigma”, Management Research
News, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 413-423.
Benbow, D.W. and Kubiak, T.M. (2010), The Certified Six Sigma Black Belt, Handbook, Pearson
Education.
Chen, S., Chen, K. and Hsia, T. (2005), “Promoting customer satisfaction by applying Six Sigma:
an example from the automobile industry”, The Quality Management Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4,
pp. 21-33.
Cho, J.H., Lee, J.H., Ahn, D.G. and Jang, J.S. (2011), “Selection of Six Sigma key ingredients (KIs)
in Korean companies”, The TQM Journal, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 611-628.
Clark, T.J. (1999), Success for Quality: Support Guide for Journey to Continuous Improvement,
ASQ: Quality Press, Milwaukee, WI.
Desai, D. (2006), “Improving customer delivery commitments the Six Sigma way: case study of an
Indian small scale industry”, International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive
Advantage, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 23-47.
Desai, T.N. and Shrivastava, R.L. (2008), “Six sigma – a new direction to quality and productivity
management”, World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science WCECS,
San Francisco, CA.
Dreachslin, J. and Lee, P. (2007), “Applying Six Sigma and DMAIC to diversity initiatives”,
Journal of Healthcare Management, Vol. 52 No. 6, pp. 361-367.
IJPPM Eckes, G. (2001), The Six Sigma Revolution, How General Electric and Others Turned Process Into
Profits, John Wiley & Sons Inc.
63,1
Firka, D. (2010), “Six Sigma: an evolutionary analysis through case studies”, The TQM Journal,
Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 423-434.
Goh, T.N. and Xie, M. (2004), “Improving on the Six Sigma paradigm”, The TQM Magazine,
Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 235-240.
122 Hendry, L. (2005), “Exploring the Six Sigma phenomenon using multiple case study evidence”,
Working Paper No. 2005/056, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster.
Hensley, R.L. and Dobie, K. (2005), “Assessing readiness for Six Sigma in a service setting”,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 82-101.
Kaushik, P. and Khanduja, D. (2008), “DM make up water reduction in thermal power plants
using Six Sigma DMAIC methodology”, Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research,
Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 36-42.
Krishna, R., Dangayach, G., Motwani, J. and Akbulut, A. (2008), “Implementation of Six Sigma
approach to quality improvement in a multinational automotive parts manufacturer in
India: a case study”, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 4
No. 2, pp. 264-276.
Kumar, M., Antony, J., Antony, F. and Madu, C. (2007), “Winning customer loyalty in an
automotive company through Six Sigma: a case study”, Quality and Reliability Engineering
International, Vol. 23 No. 7, pp. 849-866.
Kumar, S. and Sosnoski, M. (2009), “Using DMAIC Six Sigma to systematically improve shop
floor production quality and costs”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 58 No. 3, pp. 254-273.
Kumar, S., Strandlund, E. and Thomas, D. (2008), “Improved service system design using Six
Sigma DMAIC for a major US consumer electronics and appliance retailer”, International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 970-994.
Li, M.-H., Al-Refaie, A. and Yang, C.-Y. (2008), “DMAIC approach to improve the capability of
SMT solder printing process”, IEEE Transactions on Electronics Packaging
Manufacturing, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 126-133.
Lucas James, M. (2002), “The essential Six Sigma”, Quality Progress, January, pp. 27-31.
McAdam, R. and Evans, A. (2004), “Challenges to Six Sigma in a high technology mass-manufacturing
environments”, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 699-706.
Martins, R., Mergulao, R. and Junior, L. (2006), “The enablers and inhibitors of Six Sigma project
in a Brazilian cosmetic factory”, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on
Production Research – Americas’ Region (ICPR ICPR-AM06), Curitiba, July 30-August 2.
Sinthavalai, R. (2006), “A methodology to support Six Sigma implementation in SMEs as
eLearning”, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on eLearning for
Knowledge-Based Society, Bangkok, August 3-4.
Snee, R.D. (2001), “Dealing with the Achilles heel of Six Sigma initiatives”, Quality Progress,
Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 66-72.
Taner, M., Sezen, B. and Anthony, J. (2007), “An overview of Six Sigma applications in health care
industry”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 329-340.
Tjahjono, B., Ball, P., Vitanov, V.I., Scorzafave, C., Nogueira, J., Calleja, J., Minguet, M., Narasimha, L.,
Rivas, A., Srivastava, A., Srivastava, S. and Yadav, A. (2010), “Six Sigma: a literature review”,
International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 216-233.
Tong, J., Tsung, F. and Yen, B. (2004), “A DMAIC approach to printed circuit board quality
improvement”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 23
Nos 7-8, pp. 523-531.
Further reading Adoption of Six
Kumar, M. (2007), “Critical success factors and hurdles to Six Sigma implementation: the case of Sigma DMAIC
a UK manufacturing SME”, International Journal of Six Sigma and Competitive
Advantage, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 333-351.
Wessel, G. and Burcher, P. (2004), “Six Sigma for small and medium-sized enterprises”, The TQM
Magazine, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 264-272.
123
Appendix 1. Project Charter
IJPPM Appendix 2. Data for CTQs
63,1
124
Appendix III Adoption of Six
Sigma DMAIC
125
Figure A1.
Capability analysis
of KPIV’s
IJPPM About the author
Dr Anupama Prashar is a Lean Six Sigma Black Belt certified trainer and has guided
63,1 over 30 green belt projects. She has 13 years of experience in the area of research, consultancy
and management education. Her primary teaching interests are in the area of quantitative
analysis and operations management. Her research areas include operational efficiency
and business improvement. She has published a number of papers in various international
126 and national journals. She has authored books on industrial safety and environment.
Dr Anupama Prashar can be contacted at: prasharanu@gmail.com