I understand the premise of Six Sigma - if you engineer something such that the rate defects in your resulting product falls within six standard deviations of some established norm (which works out to 99.8% error-free, or something like that), you are “Six Sigma compliant”. This makes perfect sense to me in a manufacturing environment (I believe Toyota pioneered the approach to manage the quality of their product line).
My company (which does not manufacture anything) is now touting Six Sigma in every way they can. For example, our project teams which are implementing new processes and functionality within one of our core systems are said to be Six Sigma compliant. We now have Six Sigma project management methodologies. We have Six Sigma processes and Six Sigma compliant “bolt-ons” on our system.
None of these initiatives involved measuring any rate of error, either to establish a baseline or to evaluate the final product. We have our JR VPs telling executive management that everything they’ve done is Six Sigma compliant, and executive management is annoucing this to the organization. As far as I could tell, they only thing the did was hire a Six Sigma “blackbelt” (whatever that is) consultant to make project management suggestions.
Does any of this make sense? Do I not understand Six Sigma, or do we just have ppl blowing smoke up other people’s asses?