01 six sigma concept
TRANSCRIPT
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
”Operational Excellence in everything we do”
Six SigmaSix Sigma@@
EricssonEricsson
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Patrizia RattoPatrizia Ratto Laurea in Scienze dell’Informazione (Pisa)Laurea in Scienze dell’Informazione (Pisa) Lavoro in Marconi/Ericsson dal 1993Lavoro in Marconi/Ericsson dal 1993
Software Engineer (applicazioni militari)Software Engineer (applicazioni militari) Team Leader (Sviluppo NMS per applicazioni militari)Team Leader (Sviluppo NMS per applicazioni militari) Responsabile sviluppo soluzioni di collaudoResponsabile sviluppo soluzioni di collaudo Operational Development ManagerOperational Development Manager
Gestione cambiamento/Corsi interni/Migliormamento ordinabilita’ Gestione cambiamento/Corsi interni/Migliormamento ordinabilita’ prodottiprodotti
66σσ Black Belt Black Belt Nata a Genova il 10/02/1966, sposata, due figli Lorenzo Nata a Genova il 10/02/1966, sposata, due figli Lorenzo
(2003) Davide (2006)(2003) Davide (2006)
[email protected]@ericsson.com
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
”” What brought us here
will not keep us here
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Research show that only 16% of change Research show that only 16% of change programs are successfully deliveredprograms are successfully delivered
Most Transformations Fail … … Usually Due To Poor Ownership Building
Source: Standish Group International
31% Cancelled
Business Case invalid Funding Prioritization
• • •
53% Underperform(late, over budget and/or deliver less than the requirement)
Incomplete requirements Lack of Exec Mgmt support and commitment Poor communicationsLack of consistent follow-throughLack of implementation capacity
• • • • •
16% Successful(delivered on time and on budget)
Clear statement of requirements User involvement Exec. Mgmt. support Proper training
• • • •
41% 40%
33%
23% 23%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Lack of SnrMgmt
Commitment
Lack ofCommunication
Lack ofConsistent
Follow -Through
Lack of a ClearIntegratedImplement.
Lack of ClearRealistic
Objectives
Unclear, unrealistic objectives•
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
What is Six Sigma?What is Six Sigma?
1.1. A strategy for: A strategy for: For cutting costs, increasing quality, shortening lead-For cutting costs, increasing quality, shortening lead-
times, boosting efficiency etc in a very rapid manner. times, boosting efficiency etc in a very rapid manner.
2.2. A methodology and a tool-box.A methodology and a tool-box. Well proven quality tools packed in effective project Well proven quality tools packed in effective project
models.models. A common vocabulary and language.A common vocabulary and language.
3.3. A mindset and cultural changeA mindset and cultural change.. Reveals non-value add costs to operational leaders Reveals non-value add costs to operational leaders
and brings “a sense of urgency” culture to the and brings “a sense of urgency” culture to the organization.organization.
A non-firefighting approach that is focusing on A non-firefighting approach that is focusing on critical business areas.critical business areas.
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
The history of Six SigmaThe history of Six Sigma
‘‘7474 MATSUSHITA takes over loss-making Quasar MATSUSHITA takes over loss-making Quasar (Television (Television manufacturer) from Motorola (150-180 defects per manufacturer) from Motorola (150-180 defects per 100 TV’s)100 TV’s)
‘‘7979 Defects reduced to 3 per 100 TV’sDefects reduced to 3 per 100 TV’s
‘‘8080 Quasar reports success to ASQC (Hitzelberger Report)Quasar reports success to ASQC (Hitzelberger Report)
‘‘8484 Bill Smith visits Quasar & recommends to Galvin (CEO) Bill Smith visits Quasar & recommends to Galvin (CEO) the Six the Six Sigma Sigma processprocess
‘‘8888 Motorola wins 1st Malcolm Baldridge AwardMotorola wins 1st Malcolm Baldridge Award
‘‘89 89 Onwards Six Sigma adopted by other companies Onwards Six Sigma adopted by other companies Allied Signal, Allied Signal, GE, Rank Xerox, Kodak, ABB, Siebe,…GE, Rank Xerox, Kodak, ABB, Siebe,…
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Why Six-Sigma ?Why Six-Sigma ?
99.9997% Good (6
• Seven articles lost per hour
• Unsafe drinking water one minute every seven months
• 1.7 incorrect surgical operations/week
• One short or long landing every five years
• 68 wrong drug prescriptions/year
• One hour without electricity every 34 years
99% Good (3,8
• 20,000 lost articles of mail per hour
• Unsafe drinking water for almost 15 minutes
each day
• 5,000 incorrect surgical operations/week
• Two short or long landings at most major airports each day
• 200,000 wrong drug prescriptions/year
• No electricity for almost 7 hours/month
Peter HäyhänenPeter Häyhänen© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Six Sigma Trained People at Six Sigma Trained People at EricssonEricsson
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Tra
ined
Six
Sig
ma
emp
loye
es
e-Belts
Green Belts
Yellow Belts
Managers
Black Belts
Black Belts:Black Belts: Change agents trained 20 days in change mgmt, statistical tools and qualitative methods. Requirement: 1MSEK saving
Manager Training:Manager Training:A two to three day training in coaching/managing improvements and efficient sponsorship
Yellow Belt:Yellow Belt:: A threethree to fivefive day DMAIC and simple Six Sigma tools training for people who apply Six Sigma in daily operations.
Green Belt:Green Belt:: A sixsix to ninenine day DMAIC or IDDOV selected tools training for people who apply Six Sigma in daily operations and drives smaller project.
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Six Sigma at Ericsson– Six Sigma at Ericsson– organic organic growthgrowth
1996-97Problemsolving
Assembly
Black BeltMngrs training
~750 Ksek/proj~10 proj
1998-99ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.
AssemblyTest + Sourcing
Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow Belt
~1,2 MSEK/proj~100 proj
2000-01ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.
AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogistics
Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite Belt
~1,2 MSEK/proj~250 proj
2002-03ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.Product develop.
AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SW
Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite Belt
~10 MSEK/proj~350 proj
2004-05ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.HR, Forcasting
AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SWSupport
Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite BeltGreen Belt
~10 MSEK/proj~400 proj
R
esul
ts
T
rain
ings
P
roce
ss
P
urpo
se
2006-07ProblemsolvingCost. reduc.Lead time reduc.HR, ForecastingMU Efficiency & C.S
AssemblyTest + SourcingR&D - HWLogisticsR&D - SWSupportServices
Black BeltMngrs trainingYellow BeltChampionWhite BeltGreen Belt
~10 MSEK/proj~500 proj
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Six Sigma Deployment Six Sigma Deployment StructureStructure
Champions: Champions: A Business aligned two day add-on training to the line managers training. Gives you deployment strategies, Six Sigma to business alignment and Six Sigma program support.
YellowYellow- / Green Belts:Green Belts: A threethree or sixsix day DMAIC and simple Six Sigma tools training is for people who wants to apply Six Sigma in daily operations and drive tasks in Black Belt projects.
Black BeltsBlack Belts:: 1-2 % of the staff is trained in 20 days in defining and driving business goals aligned projects selected and sponsored by the top management.
Master Black BeltsMaster Black Belts:: Is a Black Belt trainer, project- and management team (MT) coach. Runs typically cross functional projects, is a methodology coach for ~10 Black Belts, helps M.T. to align the Six Sigma initiatives with the business strategy.
Six Sigma Line Mgrs:Six Sigma Line Mgrs:A two day training in tools and project models to coach and drive Six Sigma work in projects and processes. You learn what to expect from your Black-, Yellow and White belts is you do your share of the work.
White Belts:White Belts: Is an universal training for blue collar workers and everybody who only wants an introduction. In one day you get an understanding of COPQ and Variation.
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
New Tools Same New Tools Same Behaviours?Behaviours?
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Six Sigma is a systematic, Six Sigma is a systematic, pragmatic and focused approach pragmatic and focused approach
to fulfill business objectives to fulfill business objectives
Identify
Define
Design
Optimize
Validate
Design objectives
Define
Measure
Analyze
Improve
Control
Improvement objectives
applied in thoroughly defined project assignments
Not an vague philosophy and religion that many un-Not an vague philosophy and religion that many un-trained people tends to think. trained people tends to think. A statistical toolbox A statistical toolbox used to focus on variation, probability for defects used to focus on variation, probability for defects
and cost of failuresand cost of failures
QFDDoE
ANOVA
SPS
T-testYield
FMEA7MT
BenchmarkPDSA
CapabilityRegressionTaguchi
7QCT
Well proven tools & techniques
An customer focusedOutside Inthinking
Ericsson’s view of corporate contribution
Customer view ofEricsson contribution
Exposure of Cost Of Poor Quality and Non Value-Add operations
Non-value addOperations &
Costs
Value addValue add
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Why is this change needed?Why is this change needed?
Understand where do we stand today?Understand where do we stand today?
What is the financial value of this change?What is the financial value of this change?
Which performance results has to be achieved?Which performance results has to be achieved?
From whom do we need strong commitment?From whom do we need strong commitment?
What can go wrong and hinder success? What can go wrong and hinder success?
How is the change program going to be undertaken? How is the change program going to be undertaken?
How can the project easily be summarized?How can the project easily be summarized?
A proper definition of the program is critical A proper definition of the program is critical for successful performancefor successful performance
Problem statement
Goalstatement
Businesscase
Stakeholdermgmt
Riskanalysis
Baselineanalysis
Projectcharter
Projectplan
”A problem well stated is a problem half solved”
Activities from DMAIC - Define
What is Quality?What is Quality?
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Why measure?Why measure?
We don't knowWe don't know what we don't know ... what we don't know ...
If we can’t put number to it If we can’t put number to it
we really do not know much about it…we really do not know much about it…
If we don't know much about itIf we don't know much about it
we can not act ...we can not act ...
If we can not act,If we can not act,
we are at the mercy of chance ...we are at the mercy of chance ...
Dr Mikel J Harry
”Six Sigma founder Motorola”
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
“Good quality does not necessarily mean high quality. It means a predictable degree of uniformity and dependability at low cost with a quality suited to the market.”
Dr. W. Edwards Deming
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Why do we need to work Why do we need to work with quality?with quality?
Customer satisfactionCustomer satisfaction Market shareMarket share RevenueRevenue
Operational Efficiency Operational Efficiency Cost reductionCost reduction
Higher profitabilityHigher profitability Less claimsLess claims Less reworkLess rework Less materialLess material
Higher ITO (Inventory Turn Over)Higher ITO (Inventory Turn Over)
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Successful Successful DeploymentDeployment
MethodologyMethodology
Change Change ManagementManagement
ResultsResults
Six Sigma is a systematic Six Sigma is a systematic way to Operational way to Operational
Excellence Excellence
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
I have no time for any salesman. I’m going to war!
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
The hidden change barriers -Formal authority-
-Logic- -Procedures-
-Organization charts- -Budget-
-Time schedule- -Tools/Methods-
-Fear- -Trust- -Informal authority-
-Self esteem- -Previous experiences-
-Private life- -Social networks-
-Hierarchy- -Personal perspective-
-Personal & Organizational self confidence-
-Insecurity- -Culture and atmosphere-
-Unclear communication- -Conservatism-
-Status- -Disbelief- -Prestige-
-Rumors- -Unspoken consequences-
Change leaders
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
5% 20%
50%
20% 5%
“Change Leaders”Terrorists & Resistors
I’ll go!May I, Can I?
I’ll wait and seeIf I
absolutely must
I will never!
Change Management distribution
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Successful Successful DeploymentDeployment
MethodologyMethodology
Change Change ManagementManagement
ResultsResults
Six Sigma is a systematic Six Sigma is a systematic way to Operational way to Operational
Excellence Excellence
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
ImprovementsImprovementsDMAICDMAIC
Six SigmaSix Sigma
DesignDesignIDDOVIDDOV
IntegratedIntegratedTool by toolTool by tool
Existing Existing Business Business
GoalsGoals
Black BeltsBlack BeltsLine ManagersLine Managers
ChampionsChampionsYellow BeltsYellow Belts
QFDDoE
ANOVA
SPS
T-testYield
FMEA7MT
BenchmarkPDSA
CapabilityRegressionTaguchi
7QCT
Well proven tools & techniques
• CoachingCoaching• External Benchmark External Benchmark • Best practice data baseBest practice data base
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Successful Successful DeploymentDeployment
MethodologyMethodology
Change Change ManagementManagement
ResultsResults
Six Sigma is a systematic Six Sigma is a systematic way to Operational way to Operational
Excellence Excellence
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Project models within Project models within EricssonEricsson
Other ”Just do it” Projects/Programs
P R O P S
D M A I C
Improvements
New designs - DFSS
I D
D
O V
E A
F C
G
B HDL
KJ IM
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Define “Critical To Quality” Define “Critical To Quality” characteristicscharacteristicsFlow-down Customer, Stakeholder, Governmental and History critical to Satisfaction Y´s down to tangible CTQ’s and design X’s
Design Product & Process conceptDesign Product & Process conceptBuild concepts and judge them to CTQ’s and X’s. Simulate and explore product robustness to manufacturing and usage variation.Simulate and explore process robustness to product and manufacturing variation.
Design For Six SigmaDesign For Six Sigma (IDDOV – the concept)
Optimize Product Optimize Product & Process design& Process design
Run experiments, analyze data and set design and process parameters to optimize for robustness.
CustomersUnderstand and quantify Customers needs andrequirements
StakeholdersUse Corporate Business Goals and flow down to Design financial goals and Business Case
HistoryEvaluate historical external & internal data to find CTQs
Validate Product & ProcessValidate Product & ProcessValidate product (and process) performance to CTQ’s and customer and stakeholder requirements.Set up appropriate product and process control mechanisms to establish long term quality assurance IIdentifydentify
DDefineefine
DDesignesign
VValidatealidate
OOptimizeptimizeTG2
TG1
TG3
TG4
TG5
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Find “Critical To Quality” Find “Critical To Quality” characteristicscharacteristicsQFDCTQ-treeCause& Effect matrixTaguchi Loss functionsBusiness caseCTQ-scorecardBenchmarkingPCM (yield matrix)Capability analysis
Build a Product & Process conceptBuild a Product & Process conceptPugh Concept Selection MatrixProcess mappingTaguchi Loss functionsSimulations (Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc)FMEA (Product, Process, Supply-chain)Robust engineering PCM (yield matrix)
IIdentifydentify
DDefineefine
DDesignesign
VValidatealidate
OOptimizeptimizeTG2
TG1
TG3
TG4
TG5
Design For Six SigmaDesign For Six Sigma (IDDOV – the tools)
Optimize Product Optimize Product & Process design& Process design
DOEGauge R&RPoke-YokeCapability analysisAnova
Robust engineeringRegression analysisFault treesPCM (yield matrix)DMAIC
CustomersSurveys, VOC Taguchi Loss functions Kano-model
StakeholdersStakeholder map,Business CaseCTQ-tree
History7QCT, Capability analysisRegression analysis
Validate Product & ProcessValidate Product & ProcessDOEGauge R&RSPCPoke-YokeCapability analysis
AnovaP-diagramRegression analysisFault treesDMAICPCM (yield matrix)
CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//
Y tol//
Z dpmo
etc..
CTQ-scorecard
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IIDDOVDDOV
We understand what has to be done We understand what has to be done from a product, process and financial standpoint.from a product, process and financial standpoint.
IdentifyIdentify
Kano-modelBusiness CaseLoss Functions
What should we offer and is it a
economical beneficial deal for
us?
Voice of the BusinessVoice of the Business
Surveys, focus groups,
interviews
What is the market (n * customer) need
behind the requirements?
Voice of the CustomerVoice of the Customer
satisfied
omitted included
delightM
ore is
bett
er
Must be
dissatisfied
Offerings
Customer Satisfaction
Less Less correctcorrect
LessLesscorrectcorrect
0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9
Process Variation Quality Loss Function
MoreMoreCorrectCorrect
Process Capability
What is our What is our previous design previous design
track record?track record?
Voice of the ProcessVoice of the Process
Process map
Equip.Mgmt.
Order/ Leasing
Pick-Up & Delivery
Customer Service
Billing
Customercalls for
repair
CSRqualifies
customersneed
CSREnters case
in CIS
Branchshedules
repair
Servicerfixes
problem
CSRverifies
customersatisfaction
CSRcompletes
case
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IIDDDOVDOV
Key specific goals critical to Key specific goals critical to achieve in the design work (CTQ). achieve in the design work (CTQ).
How, when and who must we assure How, when and who must we assure CTQs trough the design activities?CTQs trough the design activities?
Voice of the Voice of the CustomerCustomer Voice of Voice of
the the BusinessBusiness
Voice of the Voice of the ProcessProcess
BenchmarkCause & Effect diagram, 7MT
Loss functions, Stakeholder map,
CTQ tree, QFD, Q systemization
DefineShorter lead-timesShorter lead-times
InstallationInstallation
DeliveryDelivery
QuotationsQuotations
No errors (did understand custiomer needs)Responsivness
Meets customer needs
No updates
To site delivery
Short assambly time
Test trail done same day as site installation
Accessible sales staff
Equip.Mgmt.
Order/ Leasing
Pick-Up & Delivery
Customer Service
Billing
Customercalls for
repair
CSRqualifies
customersneed
CSREnters case
in CIS
Branchshedules
repair
Servicerfixes
problem
CSRverifies
customersatisfaction
CSRcompletes
case
B: Yield=?defects X2
C: Yield=? defects X1,5
A: Yield=?defects X1
D: Yield=? defects X1
Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=?
S&D=1,5
Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=?F6=50 dpmoF7=150 dpmo
S&D=0,9
Functions
Y1…Y10=?
S&D=1,5
Functions Y1=?Y2=?Y3=?Y4=?Y5=99.993F6= 25 dpmoF7=15 dpmoF8=90 dpmo
S&D=1,6
Ytot = 85% Target Yield
Step-1Customer Requirements
Step-2Regulatory Requirements
Step-3Customer Importance Ratings
Step-4Customer
Rating of the Competition
Step-5 Technical Descriptors -"Voice of the Engineer"
Step-6 Direction of Improvement
Step-7 Relationship Matrix
Step - 8 Technical Analysis of Competitor Products
Step - 9 Target Values for Technical Descriptors
Step-10 Correlation
Matrix
Step-11 Absolute Importance
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IDIDDDOVOV
Pugh
Concept
Selection Matrix
Taguchi Loss functions
Montecarlo & statistical simulations
(functions, Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc)
CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//
Y tol//
Z dpmo
etc..
CTQ-scorecard
DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard
Design
Q systemization
Statistical tolerancing23
22
21
2Total
Sum of all parts...Part
/system 1
Part/
system 3
Part/
system 2
P-diagramsOut-put parameter (Y’s)
Input parameters (x’s)
Engineering (design) parameters
Noise parameters
System
SMD RF-TXRF-RXSUBET - 1ET - 2ET - 3SYSTSYST E1SYS E2Final ETotal
MaterialProcess.ReworkScrapTotal Yield (fp)TK (sek)10700 2360 1523 79315376 25%
Production tariff (sek) 3000 4200 4200 3000 750 750 750 750 750 750 750Reparation tariff (sek) 525 525 525 525 500 500 500 500 500 500 500Material cost (sek) 3500 3000 3000 200 1000 10700Repair material cost 400 400Processtime (min) 4,0 6,0 6,0 2,5 4,6 6,0 9,0 7,0 24,0 10,0 35,0
1:st reparationtime (min) 0,0 20,0 20,0 5,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 0,0 60,0 120,0 60,02:nd reparationtime (min) 20,0 20,0 5,0 45,0 60,0 60,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,03:rd reparationtime (min) 20,0 20,0 5,0 90,0 90,0 90,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,04:th reparationtime (min) 0,0 0,0 0,0 90,0 90,0 90,0 0,0 60,0 90,0 60,0Processtime after rep. 0,0 6,0 6,0 5,0 4,6 6,0 9,0 7,0 24,0 10,0 35,0Yield 1:st pass (%) 75% 80% 89% 90% 98% 95% 90% 85% 95% 85% 90%Yield 2:nd pass (%) 100% 90% 95% 95% 99% 98% 95% 100% 98% 93% 95%Yield 3:rd pass (%) 100% 95% 97% 98%100% 99% 98% 100% 99% 96% 98%Yield 4:th pass (%) 100% 98% 99%100%100%100% 99% 100% 100% 99%100%
Scrap % 1,00%2,00%2,00%0,75%0,01%0,01%1,00%0,00%0,01%1,00%0,01%Rejections from later steps (%)3,00%15,00%15,00%1,00%0,00%0,00%10,00%0,00%0,00%0,00%0,00%Processing cost (sek) 1:st200,0 420,0 420,0125,0 57,5 75,0112,5 87,5 300,0125,0437,5 2360Reparation cost (sek) 0,0 87,5 59,9 8,1 8,8 38,5136,5 0,0 45,2240,9 88,6 714Scrapp cost (sek) 37,0 76,8 74,9 90,3 1,2 1,2 126,4 0,0 1,3 146,2 1,5 557
Proc. cost after repair (sek) 0,0 334,1 263,3 43,8 1,7 6,6 21,1 0,0 27,1 33,9 77,6 809Material cost repair (sek) 135,0 101,3 0,0 236
Total cost 3737 4053 39191217712246123671276412851,4142251477115376
Extra processtime (min) 0,00 3,15 2,14 0,93 0,14 0,53 2,59 1,05 2,17 2,71 6,20Capacity loss due to repair 0% 34% 26% 27% 3% 8% 22% 13% 8% 21% 15%
11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65
Upper SpecLower Spec
sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83
Capability analysis
11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65
Upper SpecLower Spec
sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83
Capability analysis
11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65
Upper SpecLower Spec
sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83
Capability analysis
11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65
Upper SpecLower Spec
sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTarg
CpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.9525
5360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.001.912.502.503.172.83
Capability analysis
11.3511.2511.1511.0510.9510.8510.7510.65
Upper SpecLower Spec
sMean-3sMean+3sMeannkLSLUSLTargCpmCpkCPLCPUCpShort-Term Capability0.000.000.000.00 ObsPPM<LSL Exp ObsPPM>USL Exp Obs %<LSL Exp Obs %>USL Exp 0.047110.811311.093710.95255360.00 0.12 10.60 11.40 11.00
1.912.502.503.172.83
Capability analysis
DOEFMEA (Design, Process, Supply-chain)
PotentialFailure Effects
SEV
Potential Causes OCC
Current Controls DET
RPN
Actions
Recommended Resp.
Operator skill/training
Motor frame is unstable
3 1 6 1
8Operator knowledge Ticket specifies - but coded
Coding chart to be issued & displayed by machine
DarrenWooler
Parameter/ Concept
Impo
rtan
ce 1. Functionalorganisation(description)
2. Projectorganisation(description)
3. Matrix-organisation offunctions and topfive customers(description)
4. Product-generationorganisation(description)
Knowledge development 1 S W S W
Flexibility 1 S B S S
Customer focus 1 S B B S
Cost control 2 SS BB SS WW
Co-operation 1 S B B S
Simplicity for newemployees.
1 S W S B
Long term continuity 1 S W W W
Sum 0 W 3 W / 5 B 1 W / 2 B 4 W / 1 B
1
2 4
3
Transfer functions
Less Less correctcorrect
LessLesscorrectcorrect
0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7
Process VariationQuality Loss Function
MoreMoreCorrectCorrect
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IDDIDDOOVV
Gauge R&R
DOE
Anova
FMEA
Poke-Yoke
Hypothesis testing
Power & Sample Size
CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//
Y tol//
Z dpmo
etc..
CTQ-scorecard DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard
Capability analysis
Optimize
Error type
Harm
Error type
Harm
Adapted from James Reason’s Managing the Risk of Organizational Accidents
Gage name:Date of s tudy :Reported by :
Tolerance:Misc :
043.9
44.0
44.1
44.2Joe M ar y Pat
Xbar Chart by Name
Sa
mp
le M
ea
n
Mean=44.11UCL=44.14
LCL=44.09
0
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04Joe M ar y Pat
R Chart by Name
Sa
mp
le R
an
ge
R=0.01280
UCL=0.04182
LCL=0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
44.0
44.1
44.2
Part ID
NameName*Part ID Interaction
Av
era
ge
J oe Mary Pat
Joe Mary Pat
43.95
44.05
44.15
44.25
Name
By Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
43.95
44.05
44.15
44.25
Part ID
By Part ID
%Contribution %Study Var %Tolerance
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part
0
50
100
Components of Variation
Pe
rce
nt
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Measure
555045403530
USLLSL
Process Capability Analysis
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
Ppk
PPL
PPU
Pp
Cpm
Cpk
CPL
CPU
Cp
StDev (Overall)
StDev (Within)
Sample N
Mean
LSL
Target
USL
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
12500,00
0,00
12500,00
2,30
2,34
2,30
2,32
*
3,20
3,26
3,20
3,23
1,79818
1,29107
80
44,6165
32,0000
*
57,0000
Exp. "Overall" PerformanceExp. "Within" PerformanceObserved PerformanceOverall Capability
Potential (Within) Capability
Process Data
Within
Overall
TruthTruth
DecisionDecision
Type IErrorrisk
Type IIErrorrisk
CorrectDecision
CorrectDecision
Ho
Ho Ha
Ha
SEV * OCC * DET = RPN
(3 *1*6 = 18)
SEV * OCC * DET = RPN
(3 *1*6 = 18)
PotentialFailure Effects
SEV
Potential Causes OCC
Current Controls DET
RPN
Actions
Recommended Resp.
Operator skill/training
Motor frame is unstable
3 1 6 1
8
Recommended actions and person responsible for implementation.
Operator knowledge Ticket specifies - but coded
Coding chart to be issued & displayed by machine
DarrenWooler
Risk Priority Number
(RPN)
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IDDOIDDOVV CTQ Requ Sim. P.1 P.2 Pre.S PRA X tol//
Y tol//
Z dpmo
etc..
CTQ-scorecard
DFSS ScorecardDFSS Scorecard
Validate
Power & Sample size
Gauge R&R
Design Of Experiments
Capability analysis
Statistical Process Control
2004
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51
EWMA
+3S
+2S
+1S
Linest
Profile
-1S
-2S
-3S
>3S
9pt
+/- 6Pt
14Pt alter
2(3) +/-2S
4(5) +/-1S
15Pt In S
8Pt +/- 1S
200220032004År 0,10
0,200,25
95000100000105000
Välj antal
Gage nam e:Date of s tudy :Reported by :
To leranc e:M is c :
043 .9
44.0
44.1
44.2Joe M ar y Pat
Xbar Chart by Name
Sa
mp
le M
ea
n
M ean=44.11UCL=44.14
LCL=44.09
0
0.00
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04Joe M ar y Pat
R Chart by Name
Sa
mp
le R
an
ge
R=0.01280
UCL=0.04182
LCL=0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
44.0
44.1
44.2
Part ID
Nam eName*Part ID Interaction
Av
era
ge
J oe M ary Pat
J oe M ary Pat
43 .95
44.05
44.15
44.25
Nam e
By Name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
43.95
44.05
44.15
44.25
Part ID
By Part ID
%Contribution %Study Var %Toleranc e
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part
0
50
100
Components of Variation
Pe
rce
nt
Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Measure
555045403530
USLLSL
Process Capability Analysis
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
PPM Total
PPM > USL
PPM < LSL
Ppk
PPL
PPU
Pp
Cpm
Cpk
CPL
CPU
Cp
StDev (Overall)
StDev (Within)
Sample N
Mean
LSL
Target
USL
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
12500,00
0,00
12500,00
2,30
2,34
2,30
2,32
*
3,20
3,26
3,20
3,23
1,79818
1,29107
80
44,6165
32,0000
*
57,0000
Exp. "Overall" PerformanceExp. "Within" PerformanceObserved PerformanceOverall Capability
Potential (Within) Capability
Process Data
Within
Overall
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
IdentifyIdentify Customers, Stakeholders & History.
•Surveys, VOC•Taguchi Loss functions•Kano-model•Stakeholder map•Business case•7QCT•Capability analysis•Regression analysis
• Team training &
coaching
DefineFind “Critical To Quality” characteristics.
•QFD•CTQ-tree•Cause & Effect matrix•Taguchi Loss functions•Business case•CTQ scorecard•Benchmarking•PCM (yield matrix)•Capability analysis
•Team training & coaching
DesignBuild a product & Process concept.
•Pugh Concept Selection Matrix•Process Mapping•Taguchi Loss Functions•Simulations (Lead-times, Yield, Cost etc.)•FMEA (Product, Process, Supply-chain)•Fishbone diagram•PCM (yield matrix)
• Team training & coaching
OptimizeOptimize Product & Process design.
•DOE•Gauge R&R•Poka-Yoke•Capability analysis•Anova•P-diagram•Regression analysis•Fault trees•PCM (yield matrix)•DMAIC
•Team training & coaching
ValidateValidate Product & Process.
•DOE•Gauge R&R•SPC•Poka-Yoke•Capability analysis•Anova•P-diagram•Regression analysis•Fault trees•DMAIC•PCM (yield matrix)
• Team training & coaching
IDDOV ChartIDDOV Chart
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Merging Behavior Change and Merging Behavior Change and Operational Change into one Operational Change into one
Improvement ProcessImprovement Process
Project Monitoring and Support Process
Project Execution Phase
Realization Hand-overEstablishment
Steering Decision Process
ProjectConclusion
Phase
ProjectAnalysis Phase
ProjectPlanning
Phase
TG0 TG1 TG2 TG3 TG4 TG5
MS3
MS4
MS6
MS5
MS1.1
MS1
MS2
MS1.2
Improvement Process
Defin
e
Imp
rov
e
Co
ntro
l
Me
as
ure
An
aly
ze
D M A I C
Low High
C Keep Satisfied
A Minimal effort B Keep informed
D Key players
Low
Hig
h
Individual A
Individual B
Individual C
Individual D
Area manager B
Individual F
Individual E
All line-operators
High Probability
High Impact
Low Probability
High Impact
High Probability
Low Impact
Low Probability
Low Impact
E
A
FCGB
HD
Improve
TG2 Decision
Timeplan (Improve-Control)
Update project definition /incl final goals)
Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review
Analyze of data
Analyze
Cause& Effect relations (7MT)
Benchmark others
Measurement system analysis
Start to measure
Data collection plan
Process map "As Is"
Measure
TG1 Decision Milestone plan
Risk analysis
Communication plan
Stakeholder analysis Process map
TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2
Business Case Goal statement
Customer, Sponsor and project team
Baseline estimation
Problem stated
Define 13121110987654
19.518.016.515.013.512.010.5
LSL USL
LSL 10
Target *USL 20
Sample Mean 17.2456Sample N 57
StDev(Within) 1.09233
StDev(Overall) 1.44831
Process Data
Cp 1.53
CPL 2.21CPU 0.84
Cpk 0.84
Pp 1.15
PPL 1.67
PPU 0.63Ppk 0.63
Cpm *
Overall Capability
Potential (Within) Capability
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 52631.58PPM Total 52631.58
Observed Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 5841.45PPM Total 5841.45
Exp. Within Performance
PPM < LSL 0.28
PPM > USL 28598.99PPM Total 28599.27
Exp. Overall Performance
WithinOverall
Process Capability of Buffer level (last 2 months)
Delivery perfomance
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
2004
w45
2004
w46
2004
w47
2004
w48
2004
w49
2004
w50
2004
w51
2004
w52
2004
w53
2005
w01
2005
w02
2005
w03
2005
w04
2005
w05
2005
w06
2005
w07
2005
w08
2005
w09
2005
w10
2005
w11
2005
w12
2005
w13
SMART
Leadingchange
Leadingchange
Creating ashared need
Creating ashared need
Shapinga vision
Shapinga vision
Mobilizingcommittment
MobilizingcommittmentModifying systems
and structures
Modifying systemsand structures
Monitoringprogress
Monitoringprogress
Making it last
Making it last
SuccessfulChange Process
SuccessfulChange Process
Improvement name:
Improvement Driver
Sponsor:
Reference number: Sta
rt day
:Define review :Measure ‘’
: Analyze ‘’
: Improve ‘’
:Control ‘’
:Closure day
:
Team members: (Name / function / %-time)
Biggest risks:
Problem statement:
Goal statement:
Business case:
Improvement Scope:
Sponsor: (Sign/date)
Improvement leader: (Sign/date)
Line manager: (Sign/date)
Mentor/coach: (Sign/date)
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Understand need of change
DMAIC DMAIC – Ericsson Improvement – Ericsson Improvement
processprocess Understand
realityIdentify
root-causesMake it happen Make it stick
DEFINE MEASURE ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL
•Why do we need to change?•What’s the goal?•Who needs to be involved?
•What’s the current way of working?•How do we measure this?
•What are the root-causes?•How do they influence the goal fulfillment?
•Will you fulfill the goal with selected solution?•How do you implement this with people commitment? •How do you track progress?
•Has the goal been fulfilled?•How to secure that the implementation will stick?
Delivery perfomance
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
2004w
45
2004w
46
2004w
47
2004w
48
2004w
49
2004w
50
2004w
51
2004w
52
2004w
53
2005w
01
2005w
02
2005w
03
2005w
04
2005w
05
2005w
06
2005w
07
2005w
08
2005w
09
2005w
10
2005w
11
2005w
12
2005w
13
Company B
0 . 0
10 0 . 0
2 0 0 . 0
3 0 0 . 0
4 0 0 . 0
5 0 0 . 0
6 0 0 . 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7
0
10
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
TOT TOT raw mtrl TOT TOT Work in progress TOT TOT Finished goods
8 w eek inv days Inv days
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TRX
RA
X
ETM
4
CU
ETM
C
ETM
1
RFI
F
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TRX
RA
X
ETM
4
CU
ETM
C
ETM
1
RFI
F
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
Improve TG2 Decision
Timeplan (Improve-Control)
Update project definition /incl final goals)
Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review Analyze of data Analyze
Cause& Effect relations (7MT) Benchmark others
Measurement system analysis Start to measure
Data collection plan Process map "As Is"Measure TG1 Decision Milestone plan Risk analysis Communication plan Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision
Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case Goal statement
Customer, Sponsor and project team Baseline estimation Problem statedDefine 13121110987654week
W0509W0452W0442W0430W 0420W 0410Week
11
Mean=1,652UCL=4,220
LCL=-0,9170
1 2 3
15
10
5
0
Mov
ing R
ange
1
R=0,9658
UCL=3,156
LCL=0
1 2 3
Delivery Precision Supplier 2004-2005w17
After phase completion you will have clear answers on the following questions:
”Do the right things the right way”
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
”A problem well stated is a problem half solved”
Create shared need Define wanted position Mobilize commitment
Identify sponsor & change leader
State problem/opportunity Calculate business case Evaluate change readiness
Define Goal statement Perform risk analysis Benchmark similar
improvement initiatives
Perform stakeholder analysis Define communication/
involvement plan Involve key stakeholders to
make change happen Complete improvement charter
Why do we need to change?
What’s the goal? Who needs to be involved?
Delivery perfomance
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
20
04
w4
5
20
04
w4
6
20
04
w4
7
20
04
w4
8
20
04
w4
9
20
04
w5
0
20
04
w5
1
20
04
w5
2
20
04
w5
3
20
05
w0
1
20
05
w0
2
20
05
w0
3
20
05
w0
4
20
05
w0
5
20
05
w0
6
20
05
w0
7
20
05
w0
8
20
05
w0
9
20
05
w1
0
20
05
w11
20
05
w1
2
20
05
w1
3
High Probability
High Impact
Low Probability
High Impact
High Probability
Low Impact
Low Probability
Low Impact
E
A
FCG B
HD
DEFINEUnderstand
need of change
MEASUREUnderstand
reality
ANALYZEIdentify
root-causes
IMPROVEMake it happen
CONTROLMake it
stick
DEFINE DEFINE Understand need of changeUnderstand need of change
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Define Phase - Key StepsDefine Phase - Key StepsDefineDefine the task and its financial impact
MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod
AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes
ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions
ControlEnsure thatthe results will last
Stakeholder map
Fo
rmal
or
info
rmal
au
tho
rity
Level of true Individual InterestLow High
C Keep Satisfied
A Minimal effort B Keep informed
D Key players
Low
Hig
h
Individual A
Individual B
Individual C
Individual D
Area manager B
Individual F
Individual E
All line-operators
Area manager B
S i x S i g m a D M A I C p r o j e c t c h a r t e r
P r o j e c t n a m e : L e a d - t i m e r e d u c t i o n o n t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a
S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n
P r o j e c t n u m b e r :
S t a r t d a y : D e f i n e r e v i e w : M e a s u r e ‘ ’ : A n a l y z e ‘ ’ : I m p r o v e ‘ ’ : C o n t r o l ‘ ’ : C l o s u r e d a y :
2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1
P r o j e c t m e m b e r s : ( N a m e / f u n c t i o n / % - t i m e ) J o r g e A d u n a / P r o j e c t L e a d e r / 5 0 %
K e y w o r d s :
P r o b l e m / o p p o r t u n i t y s t a t e m e n t : L e a d - t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e d e c r e a s i n g d u e t o m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n . L o w y i e l d d u r i n g i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n a n d b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s o b s e r v e d . M a n y o f t h e y i e l d p r o b l e m s c a n b e r e l a t e d t o i n c o m p l e t e t e s t d e s i g n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t l e a d - t i m e s s h o u l d d e c r e a s e t o m e e t t h e n e w r e q u i r e m e n t s . G o a l s t a t e m e n t :
7 0 % Y i e l d o n L N A t e s t f o r t h e F U 1 7 0 0 a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n , 1 0 % i n c r e a s e i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h F U 1 9 0 0 ( 6 0 % ) . A s a r e s u l t o f a f i n a l i z e d t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a u t o m a t i c t e s t f i x t u r e s ) .
F U 1 7 0 0 v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o s t a r t Q 2 2 0 0 6 B u s i n e s s c a s e : B a s e d o n a p r o d u c t i o n v o l u m e o f 3 6 0 0 L N A u n i t s p e r m o n t h :
A 1 0 % 1 s t p a s s y i e l d i n c r e a s e i n t h e L N A t e s t m e a n s 1 2 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o l e s s r e - t e s t i n g . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e a u t o m a t i c L N A t e s t f i x t u r e m e a n s 8 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o s h o r t e r p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
P r o j e c t c o s t s : 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K S a v i n g s i n 3 m o n t h s p r o d u c t i o n : 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K = 5 0 0 0 0 0 S E K P r o j e c t S c o p e : L N A t e s t f o r F U 1 7 0 0 . O t h e r F U t e s t s ( T u n e , V S W R , F i n a l ) n o t i n c l u d e d . S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a ( S i g n / d a t e )
L i n e m a n a g e r : C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
B B - m e n t o r / c o a c h : C h r i s t i a n L e n n e b l a d ( S i g n / d a t e )
S i x S i g m a D M A I C p r o j e c t c h a r t e r
P r o j e c t n a m e : L e a d - t i m e r e d u c t i o n o n t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a
S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n
P r o j e c t n u m b e r :
S t a r t d a y : D e f i n e r e v i e w : M e a s u r e ‘ ’ : A n a l y z e ‘ ’ : I m p r o v e ‘ ’ : C o n t r o l ‘ ’ : C l o s u r e d a y :
2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1
P r o j e c t m e m b e r s : ( N a m e / f u n c t i o n / % - t i m e ) J o r g e A d u n a / P r o j e c t L e a d e r / 5 0 %
K e y w o r d s :
P r o b l e m / o p p o r t u n i t y s t a t e m e n t : L e a d - t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e d e c r e a s i n g d u e t o m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n . L o w y i e l d d u r i n g i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n a n d b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s o b s e r v e d . M a n y o f t h e y i e l d p r o b l e m s c a n b e r e l a t e d t o i n c o m p l e t e t e s t d e s i g n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t l e a d - t i m e s s h o u l d d e c r e a s e t o m e e t t h e n e w r e q u i r e m e n t s . G o a l s t a t e m e n t :
7 0 % Y i e l d o n L N A t e s t f o r t h e F U 1 7 0 0 a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n , 1 0 % i n c r e a s e i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h F U 1 9 0 0 ( 6 0 % ) . A s a r e s u l t o f a f i n a l i z e d t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a u t o m a t i c t e s t f i x t u r e s ) .
F U 1 7 0 0 v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o s t a r t Q 2 2 0 0 6 B u s i n e s s c a s e : B a s e d o n a p r o d u c t i o n v o l u m e o f 3 6 0 0 L N A u n i t s p e r m o n t h :
A 1 0 % 1 s t p a s s y i e l d i n c r e a s e i n t h e L N A t e s t m e a n s 1 2 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o l e s s r e - t e s t i n g . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e a u t o m a t i c L N A t e s t f i x t u r e m e a n s 8 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o s h o r t e r p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
P r o j e c t c o s t s : 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K S a v i n g s i n 3 m o n t h s p r o d u c t i o n : 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K = 5 0 0 0 0 0 S E K P r o j e c t S c o p e : L N A t e s t f o r F U 1 7 0 0 . O t h e r F U t e s t s ( T u n e , V S W R , F i n a l ) n o t i n c l u d e d . S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a ( S i g n / d a t e )
L i n e m a n a g e r : C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
B B - m e n t o r / c o a c h : C h r i s t i a n L e n n e b l a d ( S i g n / d a t e )
Project charterRisk analysisHigh Probability
High Impact
Low Probability
High Impact
High Probability
Low Impact
Low Probability
Low Impact
E
A
FCG B
HD
Savings Costs
Business case
Goal statement
Time & resource plan
Improve TG2 Decision Timeplan (Improve-Control)
Update project definition /incl final goals)
Root-Cause analysis perf. gap Goal review Analyze of data
Analyze Cause& Effect relations (7MT) Benchmark others Measurement system analysis Start to measure
Data collection plan Process map "As Is"
Measure TG1 Decision
Milestone plan Risk analysis Communication plan
Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case
Goal statement
Customer, Sponsor and project team
Baseline estimation Problem stated
Define 13121110987654week
Analysisof current base line
19.518.016.515.013.512.010.5
LSL USL
LSL 10Target *USL 20Sample Mean 17.2456Sample N 57StDev(Within) 1.09233StDev(Overall) 1.44831
Process Data
Cp 1.53CPL 2.21CPU 0.84Cpk 0.84
Pp 1.15PPL 1.67PPU 0.63Ppk 0.63Cpm *
Overall Capability
Potential (Within) Capability
PPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 52631.58PPM Total 52631.58
Observed PerformancePPM < LSL 0.00PPM > USL 5841.45PPM Total 5841.45
Exp. Within PerformancePPM < LSL 0.28PPM > USL 28598.99PPM Total 28599.27
Exp. Overall Performance
WithinOverall
Process Capability of Buffer level (last 2 months)
Change need
Delivery perfomance
0,0%
10,0%
20,0%
30,0%
40,0%
50,0%
60,0%
70,0%
80,0%
90,0%
100,0%
2004
w45
2004
w46
2004
w47
2004
w48
2004
w49
2004
w50
2004
w51
2004
w52
2004
w53
2005
w01
2005
w02
2005
w03
2005
w04
2005
w05
2005
w06
2005
w07
2005
w08
2005
w09
2005
w10
2005
w11
2005
w12
2005
w13
VoC-tree, Process maps, Sampling, Capability analysis, SMART, Business Case, Stakeholder map, Mini-risk brainstorm/FMEAVoC-tree, Process maps, Sampling, Capability analysis, SMART, Business Case, Stakeholder map, Mini-risk brainstorm/FMEATools:Tools:
SMART
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Understand “AS-IS” process Measure “AS-IS” process
Build “AS-IS” process map Understand barriers to change Setup potential cause & effect relations Benchmark
Plan and perform data collection Validate measurements Measure “AS IS” data
What is the current way of working?
How can we measure this?
MEASURE MEASURE Understand realityUnderstand reality
DEFINEUnderstand
need of change
MEASUREUnderstand
reality
ANALYZEIdentify
root-causes
IMPROVEMake it happen
CONTROLMake it
stick
”What gets measured gets done”
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Measure Phase - Key StepsMeasure Phase - Key Steps
Benchmark
Process map ”As Is”
S i x S i g m a D M A I C p r o j e c t c h a r t e r
P r o j e c t n a m e : L e a d - t i m e r e d u c t i o n o n t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a
S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n
P r o j e c t n u m b e r :
S t a r t d a y : D e f i n e r e v i e w : M e a s u r e ‘ ’ : A n a l y z e ‘ ’ : I m p r o v e ‘ ’ : C o n t r o l ‘ ’ : C l o s u r e d a y :
2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1
P r o j e c t m e m b e r s : ( N a m e / f u n c t i o n / % - t i m e ) J o r g e A d u n a / P r o j e c t L e a d e r / 5 0 %
K e y w o r d s :
P r o b l e m / o p p o r t u n i t y s t a t e m e n t : L e a d - t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e d e c r e a s i n g d u e t o m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n . L o w y i e l d d u r i n g i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n a n d b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s o b s e r v e d . M a n y o f t h e y i e l d p r o b l e m s c a n b e r e l a t e d t o i n c o m p l e t e t e s t d e s i g n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t l e a d - t i m e s s h o u l d d e c r e a s e t o m e e t t h e n e w r e q u i r e m e n t s . G o a l s t a t e m e n t :
7 0 % Y i e l d o n L N A t e s t f o r t h e F U 1 7 0 0 a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n , 1 0 % i n c r e a s e i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h F U 1 9 0 0 ( 6 0 % ) . A s a r e s u l t o f a f i n a l i z e d t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a u t o m a t i c t e s t f i x t u r e s ) .
F U 1 7 0 0 v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o s t a r t Q 2 2 0 0 6 B u s i n e s s c a s e : B a s e d o n a p r o d u c t i o n v o l u m e o f 3 6 0 0 L N A u n i t s p e r m o n t h :
A 1 0 % 1 s t p a s s y i e l d i n c r e a s e i n t h e L N A t e s t m e a n s 1 2 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o l e s s r e - t e s t i n g . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e a u t o m a t i c L N A t e s t f i x t u r e m e a n s 8 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o s h o r t e r p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
P r o j e c t c o s t s : 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K S a v i n g s i n 3 m o n t h s p r o d u c t i o n : 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K = 5 0 0 0 0 0 S E K P r o j e c t S c o p e : L N A t e s t f o r F U 1 7 0 0 . O t h e r F U t e s t s ( T u n e , V S W R , F i n a l ) n o t i n c l u d e d . S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a ( S i g n / d a t e )
L i n e m a n a g e r :
C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
B B - m e n t o r / c o a c h : C h r i s t i a n L e n n e b l a d ( S i g n / d a t e )
S i x S i g m a D M A I C p r o j e c t c h a r t e r
P r o j e c t n a m e : L e a d - t i m e r e d u c t i o n o n t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t p r o j e c t s
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a
S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n
P r o j e c t n u m b e r :
S t a r t d a y : D e f i n e r e v i e w : M e a s u r e ‘ ’ : A n a l y z e ‘ ’ : I m p r o v e ‘ ’ : C o n t r o l ‘ ’ : C l o s u r e d a y :
2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 0 7 2 0 0 5 - 0 9 - 2 0 2 0 0 5 - 1 0 - 3 1 2 0 0 5 - 1 2 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 1 - 3 1 2 0 0 6 - 0 2 - 2 8 2 0 0 6 - 0 3 - 3 1
P r o j e c t m e m b e r s : ( N a m e / f u n c t i o n / % - t i m e ) J o r g e A d u n a / P r o j e c t L e a d e r / 5 0 %
K e y w o r d s :
P r o b l e m / o p p o r t u n i t y s t a t e m e n t : L e a d - t i m e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e d e c r e a s i n g d u e t o m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n . L o w y i e l d d u r i n g i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n a n d b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s o b s e r v e d . M a n y o f t h e y i e l d p r o b l e m s c a n b e r e l a t e d t o i n c o m p l e t e t e s t d e s i g n a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . T h e t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t l e a d - t i m e s s h o u l d d e c r e a s e t o m e e t t h e n e w r e q u i r e m e n t s . G o a l s t a t e m e n t :
7 0 % Y i e l d o n L N A t e s t f o r t h e F U 1 7 0 0 a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n , 1 0 % i n c r e a s e i n c o m p a r i s o n w i t h F U 1 9 0 0 ( 6 0 % ) . A s a r e s u l t o f a f i n a l i z e d t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g a u t o m a t i c t e s t f i x t u r e s ) .
F U 1 7 0 0 v o l u m e p r o d u c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o s t a r t Q 2 2 0 0 6 B u s i n e s s c a s e : B a s e d o n a p r o d u c t i o n v o l u m e o f 3 6 0 0 L N A u n i t s p e r m o n t h :
A 1 0 % 1 s t p a s s y i e l d i n c r e a s e i n t h e L N A t e s t m e a n s 1 2 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o l e s s r e - t e s t i n g . I m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e a u t o m a t i c L N A t e s t f i x t u r e m e a n s 8 0 0 0 0 S E K i n r e d u c e d o p . t i m e d u e t o s h o r t e r p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
P r o j e c t c o s t s : 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K S a v i n g s i n 3 m o n t h s p r o d u c t i o n : 6 0 0 0 0 0 – 1 0 0 0 0 0 S E K = 5 0 0 0 0 0 S E K P r o j e c t S c o p e : L N A t e s t f o r F U 1 7 0 0 . O t h e r F U t e s t s ( T u n e , V S W R , F i n a l ) n o t i n c l u d e d . S p o n s o r : J o h a n E r i k s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
P r o j e c t l e a d e r : J o r g e A d u n a ( S i g n / d a t e )
L i n e m a n a g e r :
C h r i s t e r J o h a n s s o n ( S i g n / d a t e )
B B - m e n t o r / c o a c h : C h r i s t i a n L e n n e b l a d ( S i g n / d a t e )
Measurement system validation
Process measurements
request
for changecustomer
estimation for
level of
importanceexecute
change?1
think of
alternatives
1adjust design
specifications
New features
design
Test new
designProduce
customer
Old specifications New specifications
level of
importance
Yes 67%
No 33%
Alternatives
new specification new features
flawless design changed
product
review
specifications file
“Change of product
specifications”
request
for changecustomer
estimation for
level of
importanceexecute
change?1
think of
alternatives
1adjust design
specifications
New features
design
Test new
designProduce
customer
Old specifications New specifications
level of
importance
Yes 67%
No 33%
Alternatives
new specificationnew
features
flawless design changed
product
review
specifications file
“Change of product
specifications”
Accurate and
precise
Precise but not accurat
e
Accurate but not precise
Not accurat
e or precise
A measurement system is comparable to throwing darts at a target. There are two categories of error…
Project charter
Process maps, Sampling, Data collection, Capability analysis, MSA, BenchmarkProcess maps, Sampling, Data collection, Capability analysis, MSA, BenchmarkTools:Tools:
DefineDefine the task and its financial impact
MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod
AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes
ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions
ControlEnsure thatthe results will last
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Identify key root-causes Verify influence on goal
Analyze gap to wanted position Assess change capabilities
Verify influence on goal
What are the key root-causes or contributors?
How do they influence the goal fulfillment?
ANALYZE ANALYZE Identify root-causesIdentify root-causes
DEFINEUnderstand
need of change
MEASUREUnderstand
reality
ANALYZEIdentify
root-cause
IMPROVEMake it happen
CONTROLMake it
stick
”Study the past, shape the future”
Company B
0 . 0
10 0 . 0
2 0 0 . 0
3 0 0 . 0
4 0 0 . 0
5 0 0 . 0
6 0 0 . 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7
0
10
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
TOT TOT raw mtrl TOT TOT Work in progress TOT TOT Finished goods
8 w eek inv days Inv days
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TR
X
RA
X
ET
M4
CU
ET
MC
ET
M1
RF
IF
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TR
X
RA
X
ET
M4
CU
ET
MC
ET
M1
RF
IF
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
Company B
0 . 0
10 0 . 0
2 0 0 . 0
3 0 0 . 0
4 0 0 . 0
5 0 0 . 0
6 0 0 . 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7
0
10
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
TOT TOT raw mtrl TOT TOT Work in progress TOT TOT Finished goods
8 w eek inv days Inv days
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TR
X
RA
X
ET
M4
CU
ET
MC
ET
M1
RF
IF
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
HW changes at CDC Gävle, new production
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
MC
PA
SC
B
AIU
TR
X
RA
X
ET
M4
CU
ET
MC
ET
M1
RF
IF
TX
GP
B
Fan
Oth
e
BB
IF
PC
U
PS
U
Bac
k
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Analyze Phase - Key StepsAnalyze Phase - Key Steps
Analysis of causes
Found areas to address
50454035
130
120
110
100
90
Putts
S co re
Y = 3 3. 1 28 4 + 1. 67 5 46 X
R-Squared = 0.906
Scatter Plot/Fitted Line Regression
Reliable process measurements
request
for changecustomer
estimation for
level of
importanceexecute
change?1
think of
alternatives
1adjust design
specifications
New features
design
Test new
designProduce
customer
Old specifications New specifications
level of
importance
Yes 67%
No 33%
Alternatives
new specificationnew
featuresflawless design
changed
product
review
specifications file
“Change of product
specifications”
!
Process maps, Capability analysis, Regression analysis, Hypothesis testing, Correlation analysisProcess maps, Capability analysis, Regression analysis, Hypothesis testing, Correlation analysisTools:Tools:
DefineDefine the task and its financial impact
MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod
AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes
ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions
ControlEnsure thatthe results will last
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Identify “To-Be” process and test possible solutions
Plan and implement solution
Monitor progress
• Identify possible solutions to address key contributors
• Perform cost/benefit evaluation• Perform solution risk analyses• Test solution
• Mobilize broad commitment• Plan implementation • Competence and resource
allocation• Create & follow-up Process & IT
demands• Execute implementation plan• Embed changes in management
system
• Monitor improvement progress & people commitment
• Will you fulfill the goal with selected solution?
• How do you implement thiswith people commitment?
• How do you track progress?
request
for changecustomer
estimation for
level of
importanceexecute
change?1
think of
alternatives
1adjust design
specifications
New features
design
Test new
designProduce
customer
Old specifications New specifications
level of
importance
Yes 67%
No 33%
Alternatives
new specificationnew
features
flawless design changed
product
review
specifications file
“Change of product
specifications”
150100500
2
1
0
-1
-2
Observation Number
Indi
vidu
al V
alue
I Chart for C205
12
2
2
2
22
2
2
22
2
22
1
222
11
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
Mean=0
UCL=1,5
LCL=-1,5
DEFINEUnderstand
need of change
MEASUREUnderstand
reality
ANALYZEIdentify
root-causes
IMPROVEMake it happen
CONTROLMake it
stick
IMPROVE IMPROVE Make it happenMake it happen
”Words don’t move mountains. People do.”
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Improve Phase - Key StepsImprove Phase - Key Steps
Implementation plan
Cost/savingsanalysis of solutions Implementation fulfilled?Resource allocation
Risk analysis of solutions
Improve TG2 Decision Timeplan (Improve-Control)
Update project definition /incl final goals)
Root-Cause analysis perf. gap
Goal review Analyze of data
Analyze
Cause& Effect relations (7MT)
Benchmark others
Measurement system analysis
Start to measure Data collection plan
Process map "As Is"Measure
TG1 Decision Milestone plan
Risk analysis Communication plan
Stakeholder analysis Process map TGO Decision Project time plan TG0-TG2 Business Case
Goal statement
Customer, Sponsor and project team
Baseline estimation Problem stated
Define 13121110987654week
Found areas to address
request
for changecustomer
estimation for
level of
importanceexecute
change?1
think of
alternatives
1adjust design
specifications
New features
design
Test new
designProduce
customer
Old specifications New specifications
level of
importance
Yes 67%
No 33%
Alternatives
new specificationnew
features
flawless design changed
product
review
specifications file
“Change of product
specifications”
INSTRUCTIONINSTRUCTION
INSTRUCTION
Savings Costs
Process maps, Cost/benefit template, FMEAProcess maps, Cost/benefit template, FMEATools:Tools:
DefineDefine the task and its financial impact
MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod
AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes
ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions
ControlEnsure thatthe results will last
Severity x Occurrence x Detection
= RPN (Risk Priority Number)
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Validate results Secure sustainability Transfer good practice
• Validate improvement effect• Evaluate lesson learned
• Anchor & handshake solution ownership
• Ensure competence capability for new way of working/solution
• Ensure mechanism for continuous monitoring and improvements
• Communicate results• Transfer good practices• Celebrate achievements
Has the goal been fulfilled? Will the solution stick? Can someone else benefit from your experiences?
DEFINEUnderstand
need of change
MEASUREUnderstand
reality
ANALYZEIdentify
root-causes
IMPROVEMake it happen
CONTROLMake it
stick
CONTROL CONTROL Make it stickMake it stick
” When yesterday's future becomes business as usual.”
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Control Phase - Key StepsControl Phase - Key Steps
Learning's& best practice transfer
Resultsvalidated towards goal statement
Implementation fulfilled?
Responsibility transfer
Are solution robust?
Celebrate
W0509W0452W0442W0430W 0420W 0410Week
11
Mean=1,652UCL=4,220
LCL=-0,9170
1 2 3
15
10
5
0
Mov
ing
Ran
ge
1
R=0,9658
UCL=3,156
LCL=0
1 2 3
Delivery Precision Supplier 2004-2005w17
Observation
Indiv
idual V
alu
e
9181716151413121111
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
_X=80,99
UCL=92,64
LCL=69,34
1 2
I Chart of Total by process by Process
2005-08-29
SPC, P-diagramSPC, P-diagramTools:Tools:
DefineDefine the task and its financial impact
MeasureDevelop andvalidatemeasurementmethod
AnalyzeAnalyze theroot causes
ImproveGenerateandimplementsolutions
ControlEnsure thatthe results will last
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
DMAIC DMAIC ChartChartC
om
pre
hen
sive
Lig
ht
DefineUnderstand the task and its financial impact.
• Task selection matrix • SMART review • Stakeholder map• Risk Management
• SWOT analysis• Process map• VOC and break down to CTQs• 7MT• Affinity diagram
MeasureDevelop and execute an appropriate data collection method.
• Process map• Data collection table •Pareto diagram
• 7QCT• Measurement system analysis• Sampling technique• SIPOC• Gauge R&R, Gauge attribute• Capability analysis• Benchmark • Tagushi loss functions
AnalyzeFind the root causes.
• Fishbone diagram• Correlation analysis
• 7QCT• Hypothesis testing• Regression-analysis• DOE• Anova• 7MT• Data transformations• Simulations
ImproveGenerate and implement solutions.
• FMEA risk analysis• Process map
• Poka-Yoke• Hypothesis testing• Loss functions• Cost/Benefit selection•Pugh Concept Selection
ControlEnsure that the results will last.
• Documentation, standardization and training
• 7QCT• SPC• Business case verification
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Six ways to fail…Six ways to fail…
… D … I D … I D … I
… M … A M … A M … A
M … A M … A D D
M … A M … A D D I I
D D D D… … … …
… I … D I … D I … D
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18
Key elements for a DMAIC Key elements for a DMAIC projectproject
Has a measurable and verifiable result.Has a measurable and verifiable result. Cut cost in...Cut cost in... Reduce lead-time in…Reduce lead-time in… Reduce variation in...Reduce variation in... Improve quality in...Improve quality in...
Able to be defined by Y=f (xAble to be defined by Y=f (x11, x, x22, x, x33….. x….. xnn)) Possible influencing factors is...Possible influencing factors is... They can be controlled by...They can be controlled by... Or you can make the Y robust to them by…Or you can make the Y robust to them by…
Has a significant impact.Has a significant impact. Is important to the business, organization etc.Is important to the business, organization etc.
© Ericsson AB 2009 Commercial in confidence 01. Six-Sigma Concept 2009-03-18