# Six Sigma? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 1, 2015, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/six-sigma/736364 "2015-11-01T21:24:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 3\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/six-sigma/736364/41 "2015-11-04T16:11:57Z")
I think it is more succinct and pointed to say that statistical process control (the essential core of Sig Sigma) is only useful when you have a process amenable to statistical control, e.g. one with a relatively small number of well-defined variables and enough data to fit to a statistical distribution or trend. It doesn’t work well with problems that have a large number of variables or a paucity of consistent data, a fact that is readily apparent when you look at the results critically. Unfortunately, that critical analysis is glossed over in most applications of Six Sigma projects (at least the ones I’ve seen) or not done at all because the basic problem isn’t measurable and the participants are not versed in statistics. Most projects that do succeed in a measurable improvement typically do so not because of the methodology but often despite it, and because the participants already know what the solution needs to be (“Stop doing useless, wasteful shit like sending hourly progress reports on the change in height of growing corn,”) and have some impetus, however improperly formulated, to fix it. The same can be true of a broad array of the type of frameworks and certifications that **msmith537** inveighs about above. ISO 9001 certification–than banner of any company that seriously wants to be a supplier to top tier OEMs in any capacity–is a well-intended effort to make sure that companies have well-documented processes and maintain good records on how work was performed so that root causes of problems can be easily identified. But in the attempt to cover every possible industry and type of work, the ISO 9001 requirements don’t actually require a company to generate _useful_ processes and documentation, or even consistently apply the ones they may have; it just mandates that they have documentation of some kind. The result is that a bunch of processes are created for processes that no functional adult should need or would refer to while the critical skilled work which is difficult to train for and document thoroughly is often ignored in a single-minded pursuit of getting certified. Are you an executive-level manager who wants to actually improve your product or service? Stop pushing “business initiative” magicks down from the top without any real insight as to how they are going to be implemented at a detail level, and provide useful resources and training from the bottom up. Let the workers and line managers tell you what improvements need to be made and how they can be done, and provide the resources you have to make it so. Explicit and quantitative process improvement methods are only useful when being applied by people who understand the problem at hand and can measure the results, and as a secondary benefit, also provide a sense of ownership of the problem instead of just turning the crank on someone else’s pet methodology. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Doctor\_Jackson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctor_jackson/32/32_2.png) [@Doctor\_Jackson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doctor_Jackson)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/six-sigma/736364/42 "2015-11-04T16:19:35Z")
Other considerations are: -Many companies no longer teach/certify in pure Six Sigma these days. It’s often a blended, focused (cherry picked) flavor of the methodologies that fit that particular company. For instance, my current employer teaches “Lean Six Sigma” - a blending of Lean, Kaizan, Taguchi and Six Sigma principles. The thinking is sound - different tools for different situations - but it also means that my Six Sigma Black Belt certification is a bit different from someone at another company. -What counts as ‘certification’ also varies from company to company. Mine required 4 weeks of classroom instruction plus completion of 3 major projects over about 2 years (2 weeks class, one completed project for Green Belt; 2 weeks class and 2 major completed projects for BB). Other places require much, much less rigorous work to be certified. My suggestion would be to learn enough about Six Sigma to intelligently discuss how what you have done before is functionally equivalent and go from there. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2015, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/six-sigma/736364/43 "2015-11-04T19:29:55Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Six Sigma as well as Kaizen, Taguchi methods, QFD, and Zero Defect are quality control frameworks. > > PRINCE2 along with ITIL, PMI PMBOK, Agile, Scrum, Lean, and Extreme are project management frameworks. > > But speaking as a certified project manager and professional management consultant, I am confident that all these frameworks are bullshit. They all represent idealized approaches to managing projects or business processes that don’t necessarily work in the real world. Why don’t they work? > > Companies are typically unwilling or unable to invest the time and money required to implement a project properly using the methodology. i.e. scrimping on planning or QA. > > They lack the systems or infrastructure to properly track these projects or processes. > > Lack of training or knowledge. > > People simply don’t work like robots where you can accurately predict how long it will take to perform tasks. Particularly if those tasks have some element of uncertainty or variation like designing or writing code. > > Corporate politics tend to get in the way of actually getting anything done. > > When pressed for time or budget, companies will almost always abandon formal processes, thinking that planning and documentation just “waste time” and just plow ahead. we don’t need to throw the baby completely out with the bathwater. ITIL is really just very codified ‘good practice’. PRINCE2 is actually a really good way to make people realise that you really can make decisions in advance of choices, crises, changes etc. There are places where they are applied not religiously, but pretty much intact, and they work - and well. Impatience, if indulged and allowed to run unchecked, is the destroyer of all effective intent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/six-sigma/736364.md?page=2)