Six Sigma PDF

Technische Universität München
Six Sigma
process improvement methods and tools
Copyright
Dr. Reiner Hutwelker
Hangstrasse 6
D-86926 Eresing/ Munich
reiner.hutwelker@softLogik.de
Dr. Reiner Hutwelker Quality Engineering & Management – Module 9 1

Six Sigma Technische Universität München
Practice & Theory & Statistics

Basics Technische Universität München
Six Sigma is a concept with several meanings –– itit links Practice with

links Practice with Theory
Theory and
and Statistics
Statistics …
…
Rational procedure for company-wide quality Improvements: Practice, Theory & Statistics
Practice
- The focus is on the potentials for improvement - Problems with a company's products and services (Practice)
- Problems, Causes and Solutions are described within a Process-Problem-Solving-Model (Theory)
Theory
- Statistical tests examine the relevance of identified Causes and the success of developed Solutions (Statistics) Statistics
- Events of daily practice, their theoretical description and statistical analyses mutually corroborate each other
Practical Impact: eliminate Problems to raise Customer satisfaction and reduce costs
- Employees, managers and (internal) customers identify Problems in products and services
- Problems are defined as topics for Projects, are checked for suitability for Six Sigma and are prioritized
- Managers initiate and steer the selected Projects (Sponsor/ Process Owner)
- Method-Experts (Black-Belt/ Green-Belts) implement the Projects together with support of subject-matter-experts
Theoretical Framework: Problems in products/ services are caused by faulty Processes Input Process Output
- All Outputs of Processes (products/ services), which deviate from their Requirements, have a Problem
- These Problems belong to the categories: Quality, Availability (Quantity/ Time) and Consumption Cause Problem
- Causes of the Problems are inherent in Methods, Resources and the Inputs of the Process
Solution Effect
- To solve the Problems in the Outputs, their Causes in the Process need to be identified and eliminated
Statistical Basis: Process Capability, Process Control, Analysis of Influences and Improvements - Tolerance range -
Number of Outputs
- The Sigma Level is a measure of the Process Capability, i.e. the excellence of the Output
- At a performance level of 6 Sigma (6 ) only 3.4 errors are expected in 1 million Outputs (Process-Sigma) Influences
in the
- Control Charts indicate the variation of the Process performance, i.e. variation of the Output over the time Process
- Statistical Tests identify the main Problems and the relationships to their Causes Measure of Output
Guideline for the course of action: chronologically interlinked tools to implement the Project
- The DMAIC-Cycle (Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve and Control) is a guideline to implement Projects Control Define
- This five phases cover rational-logical and statistical tools, which are interlinked chronologically Improve Measure
- They serve to define and measure Problems, analyse their Causes, develop Solutions and control the success
- Additional tools serve to prepare the business case and to manage the Project Analyse
… to analyse potentials and to verify improvements

Basics > Theoretical Framework: Problems of Products/ Services are caused in Processes Technische Universität München
From Reality to Theory: Several things are involved in the Process of baking cookies
1 2 3 Operation 4 5 6
Manual
7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
Recipe
All pictures show elements of baking cookies. – How do they relate to each other in a Process?
Basics > Theoretical Framework: Integrated Process-Problem-Solving-Model Technische Universität München
Problems are always deviations in important attributes of the Output –
Input Check Process Output Check

Check Method (e.g. Instructions/ Rules) Customer
Does the Does the
Input/ Method/ Resource Control: HOW should be acted? requires: Output fulfill the
fulfill the Requirements? Requirements?
Operating
no: reject instructions no: Problem
yes: go on Recipe (Intermediate) yes: go on
Intermediate Product
Product +/- Influences of the Methods (xm) - (material/ immaterial)
(material/ immaterial) target range + target Range
Performance Performance
+/- Influences of + acting (e.g. transform/ transport Input) +

= Problem (Y)
the Input (xi)
- Activity: WHAT happens?
-
+
+/- Influences of the Resources (xr)
-
Quality
(Availability)
Quantity/Time
Consumption
Quality
(Availability)
Quantity/Time
Consumption
Check Resources (e.g. People/ Tools/ Energy)
Execution: WHAT / WHO acts?
negative Influences and their Root-Causes of the Input (xi), Problem (Y) in category
the Methods (xm) and the Resources (xr) of the Process Quality, Availability or Consumption
Effect (Z) on
Solutions (S) to eliminate, adjust or circumvent the Causes
Costs (VoB) & Satisfaction (VoC)
– their Causes are rooted in the Process and Inputs
Basics > Theoretical Framework: Integrated Process-Problem-Solving-Model Technische Universität München
The first barrier to start a Six Sigma Project is to …
What is the Cause? What is the Problem?

Every Problem is caused by a negative Influence x A Problem is the Deviation of an
negative Influences are located in: Output in a required Attribute:
‐ xInput What is transformed/ transported?
YPROBLEM= YATTRIBUTE_SHOULD BE – YATTRIBUTE_IS
‐ xMethods How should be acted? Every Problem can be modeled as:
‐ xResources Who/ What acts? ‐ PRODUCT (has) ATTRIBUTE (which is) DEVIANT
and might have a negative impact on the Activity. ‐ e.g. COOKIE TASTE SALTY (Q)
Every negative Influence has at least one Cause. ‐ e.g. DECISION DELIVERY TOO LATE (A)
‐ e.g. ANSWER EFFORT TOO BIG (C)
Negative Influences are analysed to their Root‐Causes
with causal‐logical and statistical methods. The attribute can always be assigned to one of the
categories: Quality, Availability (Quantity/Time) or
Consumption. The deviation then characterizes
the type of Problem, e.g. as a Quality Problem.
What is the Solution? What is the Effect?

Solutions eliminate or adjust or circumvent Effects are the consequences of the Problems on:
the Causes to switch off the Problem the company: costs and churn rate
the Customer: dissatisfaction and complaints
... identify the Problem in the available information on the issue
Basics > Statistical Basis: Process Capability, Process Control, Analysis of Influences and Improvements Technische Universität München
Requirements for an attribute of the Product span a range of tolerated Outputs (LSL – USL)
LSL LSL USL USL xbar/

xbar = 0
s = 1
LSL = ‐ 6
USL = 6
Sigma‐Level= 6
6 Standard Deviations
Frequency / Probability
6s / distance from the Mean
to each Specification
0,0000002% Limit
defects
Process Capability: 6 Sigma
68% xbar = 0

s = 2
LSL = ‐ 6
USL = 6
95%
Sigma‐Level= 3
3 Standard Deviations
3s / Distance from the Mean
3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 g to each Specification
-2 -1 +1 +2 0,27%
defects
Limit
-2s -1s Mean +1s +2s

(xbar) Process Capability: 3 Sigma
The more Outputs within the tolerance range of the specification limits are, the more capable is the Process
Basics > Six Sigma Projects link Practice, Theory and Statistics Technische Universität München
If events of the reality are modelled and if variables of the events are measured …
“Relationship”
“Difference”
Practice
Observation:
Change &
Status
Theory Project Statistics

Scatterplot Y vs. x
Input Process Output
Cause Problem
Solution Effect
Process-Problem-Model Scales
Hypothesis about: Measurement
Causality and Differences Hypothesis: Y= f(x)/ Y1=Y2
Rational Analysis Statistical Tests
… then the reality can be described, explained and forecasted
Basics > Guideline for the course of action: chronologically interlinked tools to implement the Project Technische Universität München
The DMAIC is a chronological guideline to select and apply tools …
How to reach sustainability? What is the Problem?
Prove the improvements Identify an improvement potential

Install Process Control Define Customer Requirements
Develop new standards
Control Define Set Project targets
Hand over the Project Nominate Project team
What is the Solution? Improve Measure What are the Influences?
Develop Solutions Map the As-Is-Process

Identify Risks and resistance Locate potential negative Influences
Define operational measures Analyse Form the Hypothesis
Decide and implement the measures Plan Data Collection and collect Data
What are the Causes of the Problem?
Evaluate data graphically

Calculate Process Capability
Test the Hypothesis to identify important Influences
Identify root causes of the Influences
... in the five phases of a Six Sigma Project
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Sequence Technische Universität München
DEFINE: From the identification of Problems (Y) to the Project charter
Start a new Six Sigma Project (Project-Topic – Project Definition)

- Customers, employees and managers identify potentials in Processes and Products Risk of Topic: 72%
- The potentials are evaluated, checked for suitability for Six Sigma and defined as Project-Topics
Suitability
- A manager initiates and steers the selected Project in the role of the sponsor of the Project 89%
for Six Sigma:
- Six Sigma experts (Black-Belt/ Green-Belts) establish a project team together with subject-matter experts
Delimitate and structure the field of the Project (SIPOC) Supplier-Input-Process-Output-Customer
- Delimitate the field of the Project, i.e. define the first Input and the last Output of the Process as borders Input Prozess Output
- Identify all important intermediate Outputs within the defined borders of the Process
- Identify the related Process-Steps and Inputs of the identified intermediate Outputs Input Prozess Output
- Identify the internal/external Supplier of the Inputs and the internal/external Customer of the Outputs
Voice of Customer and Business (VoC/VoB), Requirements and Critical to Quality (CtQ) VoC/ VoB > CCR/ CBR > CtQ
degree of satisfaction
delighter
- Interview the Customer and the manager to their experiences and demands on the Outputs ( VoC/VoB) My needs
and more is better
- Derive the necessary attributes of the Outputs from the demands and the deviations they do not accept complaints
- Assign attributes to the categories: Quality, Availability (quantity/time) and Consumption ( CCR/CBR) must be
- Evaluate the relevance of the attributes (KANO-Model) and estimate the degree of their fulfillment ( CtQ) fulfillment of Requirement
Setup the contract for the Project (Project-Charter) Project-Charter
- Summarize information about the Process, its important Outputs and their Problems Business- Problem
- Summarize the information that is relevant for the Customer satisfaction and the business case Relevance
- Agree on objectives and deadlines for the important measurements (CtQ´s) and on the scope of the Project Scope/ Experts
Belt-Team
- Define the team with Sponsor, Accountable, Black-/Green-Belts, Subject Matter Experts and Controlling Objective
Management
Summary DEFINE: Y defined, i.e. Outputs with their critical Requirements and Problems
Outlook MEASURE: xi, xm and xr will be defined, i.e. Influences on Y, Data Collection Plan and Hypothesis developed
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > sigmaGuide Technische Universität München
sigmaGuide is a software guide for Six Sigma Projects
Welcome to sigmaGuide
sigmaGuide is a software guide for Six Sigma Projects.

This guideline consists of three parts:
Part 1 Identify a Six Sigma Project

Initially a suitable potential for improvement will be identified, i.e. a weakness in the daily work.
To do so a problem is defined, its presumed causes and its effects.
This Part is aimed to all employees of the Company, to involve them "barrier-free" into your Improvement Program.
One Indicator shows, how suitable the Topic for Six Sigma is. Another Indicator shows the Risk of the Topic.
Part 2 Specify a Six Sigma Project

On the basis of the identified potential for improvement the Topic for a Six Sigma Project is specified.
To do so the underlying Process is concretized, its Input and Output,
the related Problems as well as their Effects on the Customer and the Business.
This Part is aimed to Employees with and without previous knowledge in Six Sigma.
Part 3 Implement a Six Sigma Project

The Topic is defined as a Six Sigma Project and structured along the DEFINE and MEASURE-Phase of the DMAIC.
From the SIPOC up to the statistical Hypothesis the important tools of the DMAIC are interlinked to a continuous Project-Guideline.
Every tool of the Guideline asks for the necessary information, integrates and prioritizes these information and transfers it to the next tool.
This Part is aimed at Green-Belts and Black-Belts.
Good Luck!
Please download your copy of sigmaGuide for this module
Part 1: Identifiy a Six Sigma Project

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > 1. Identify a Six Sigma Project Technische Universität München
The Cookie du Chef scenario showed that there are potentials to improve this bakery
Phase Tool Purpose

Define Part 1 Identify a Six Sigma Project
Project-Topic Identify Problems of the daily work as a potential for improvement
Open the table: Project-Topic
Welcome to sigmaProject
Dear Colleague,
With this guideline you can define potentials for improvement, which you observed in your working environment.
These potentials should relate to Problems with the Quality or the Lead Time of Processes or to the waste of resources.
In contrast to a typical improvement suggestion you need not have developed a solution already.
But we are very interested to know these Problems of the daily work and to bundle them in a pool of issues.
From this pool continuously improvement projects are defined and solutions implemented.
And if your issue is selected you would of course be invited to collaborate on the solution.
At first it would be helpful, if you would show us the Problem and indicate its improvement potential.
This will take about 5 minutes.
At first let us identify the Problems of the bakery
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > 1. Identify a Six Sigma Project > Project-Topic Technische Universität München
Project‐Topic: Describe your observations with your own words and answer the questions
Which weakness did you notice?
1/ 7 Please describe your observation in one sentence.

Make sure that you describe the negative aspects of the situation. Please do not describe the causes or how the situation should be.
The bakery Cookie du Chef has several Problems. Sometimes the Cookies taste insipid, sometimes the Cookies are burnt and sometimes they do not fit into
the tin. The delivery of Cookies happens too early. Additionally there might be some waste of ingredients and energy.
2/ 7 What is the key point of the weakness?

It is about the result of a work, which is transferred (Output)
please select an answer
Summary:
The bakery Cookie du Chef has several Problems. Sometimes Cookies taste insipid, sometimes Cookies are burnt and sometimes they do not fit into the tin.
Delivery of Cookies happens too early. Additionally there might be some waste of ingredients and energy.
It is a matter of the result of a work, which is transferred (Output). The Output is very often wrong, defect, inoperative, bad, damaged or faulty. The Problem
is probably caused by our own Processes and has a extremely strong negative Impact on the Customer.
Risk of the Topic: 69,18%

Suitability for Six Sigma: 80,00%
Please check the summary of our dialogue which shows your answers in context
Part 2: Specify a Six Sigma Project

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > 2. Specify a Six Sigma Project Technische Universität München
To further specify the topic as a Six Sigma Project, …
Define Part 2 Specify a Six Sigma Project

Process & Output Describe the Process and its Output
Problem Describe the Problem
Effect Describe the Effect of the Problem
Solution Outline Solution-Ideas - if already available
Project-Definition Summary: Process, Output, Problem and Effect
Open the tables and answer the questions up to the summary in the Project-Defintion
Section 1: Process and Output

Which Process for which Output should be improved?
Section 2: Problem
What in the Product is not as it should be?
Section 3: Effect
Which effects do the Problems of the Product COOKIES have?
Section 4: Solution
Which ideas do you already have in order to solve the Problems of the Product COOKIES?
… please answer the questions to the Process and Output, the Problems and their Effects
(and eventually enter your first Solution ideas)
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > 2. Specify a Six Sigma Project > Project-Definition Technische Universität München
Project Definition: Summary of all information
Project-Definition
The bakery Cookie du Chef has several Problems. Sometimes Cookies taste insipid, sometimes Cookies are burnt and sometimes they do not fit into the tin.
Delivery of Cookies happens too early. Additionally there might be some waste of ingredients and energy.
It is a matter of the result of a work, which is transferred (Output). The Output is very often wrong, defect, inoperative, bad, damaged or faulty. The Problem
is probably caused by our own Processes and has a extremely strong negative Impact on the Customer.
Risk of the Topic: 69,18%

Suitability for Six Sigma: 80,00%
Section 1: Process and Output
Summary: Summary: Voice of Customer

The satisfaction of the external customers with the:
The Product COOKIES is in focus of the project. COOKIES is a tangible final Output for external Customers and is in the Creation Process BAKE COOKIES - Quality of COOKIES is: 20%.
within a year 4 - 12 times created. Important Input of the Process to create of the Product COOKIES is BUTTER, EGGS, FLOUR, SUGAR, VANILLA.
- Availability of COOKIES is: 60%.
Section 4: Solution
Section 2: Problem
Solution Idea to 1. Problem

Summary:
Spend more sugar (?)
1. Problem: COOKIES TASTE INSIPID. COOKIES fulfills the requirement on Quality (is error-free) in 30%.
2. Problem: COOKIES DELIVERY TOO EARLY. COOKIES fulfills the requirement on Availabilty (just in time) in 40%. Solution Idea to 2. Problem
Deliver later (?)

3. Problem: COOKIES WASTE OF INGREDIENTS AND ENERGY. COOKIES fulfills the requirement on efficient utilisation of means (no waste of Input,
Resources) in 20%.
Solution Idea to 3. Problem

Section 3: Effect Recycling of spilled ingredients (?)
Summary: Voice of Business
The satisfaction of the the Process owners with the Resource Consumption in Creation Process for the Product COOKIES is: 60%. additional Information
The Quality costs by reworking are estimated to 111€ / year.

If you like you can give us some additional comments, advices, feedback
The solution of the Problems is rated as:
- medium URGENT (70%-Level)
- major IMPORTANT (80%-Level)
Would it be possible to join the team and maybe start a Green-Belt Training with this project - if selected?
Personal Data
First Name Your Surname Name
Unit Location
Telephone eMail Your.Name@Company.com
The Project definition can now enter the Project pool and might be selected for implementation
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > 3. Implement a Six Sigma Project Technische Universität München
To further specify the topic as a Six Sigma Project, …
Define Part 3 Implement a Six Sigma Project

Intro sigmaGuide Introduction to sigmaGuide
SIPOC Structure the Process in its important steps, with related Supplier, Inputs and Outputs and Customer
Voice to Criticals Identify Voice of Business/ Customer (VoC/ VoB), Critical Business/ Customer Requirements (CCR/ CBR), Problems and CtQ´s
Voice to Criticals (Summary) Summary: VoC, VoB, CCR, CBR, Problems and CtQ´s
Chart: Y CtQ´s Outputs, Problems and their Severity
Project-Charter Complete and sign the Project-Charter
Open the tables and answer the questions up to the Project charter
In the SIPOC we will:
- structure the field of the Project into the important Process-Steps, from the first Input up to the last critical Output.
All subsequent tools are based on these Inputs and Outputs. Thus it is important, to keep the SIPOC up-to-date during the project.
In the Voice-to-Criticals we will:

- link the Outputs of the SIPOC with the Voice-of-Customer (VoC) and the Voice-of-Business (VoB),
- inquire the Critical-Customer-Requirements (CCR) and the Critical-Business-Requirements (CBR),
- assign them to a Requirement category (Quality, Availability, Resource Consumption),
- assess the degree of their fulfillment and weight them by the criteria of the KANO-Model (must be/ more is better/ delighter) and
- describe deviations from the Requirements as Problems of the Output.
This results in a ranking order of the Outputs, their Requirements and Problems.
The ranking starts with the critical Outcome variables Y, i.e. the Critical-to-Quality (CtQ).
The Chart Y CTQ shows the Outcome variable Y for all Outputs.
In the Project-Charter we will:

- summarize the important information about the Process, its Problems and Business Relevance and
- supplemented by information about the scope, targets, dates and Roles.
Thus the mandate for the Six Sigma Project is defined.
… please answer the questions to the SIPOC, Voice to Criticals and the Project Charter
Part 3: Implement a Six Sigma Project

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > SIPOC Technische Universität München
SIPOC: Specify the limits of the Project by the first Input and last Output …
SIPOC
The SIPOC is a table of the Project-Field. Its purpose is to:
- define the limits of the project, from the first Input to the last Output. The last Output should be the Output with the chronological last Problem from the Problem-Statement in the
Project-Definition. Select the first Input such that the field between the first Input and the last Output covers all triggers of the last Problem.
- structure the Project-Field from the first Input (top left) to the last Output (bottom right) line by line with the important Input-Process-Output steps.
# Supplier Input Process Output Customer
determine Cookie-Type &

1 Customer (Child) Wishes Order Order Taking
Preparation-Date
determine necessary & missing Logistic & Procurement
2 Order Shopping-List
Ingredients Service
Logistic & Procurement
3 Shop Ingredients buy missing Ingredients Ingredients (complete)
Service
4 Start-Signal prepare Workspace Workspace (clean) Production Support
5 Ingredients (complete) weigh Ingredients Ingredients (weighed) Production Support
7 Ingredients (weighed) knead Ingredients Dough (Ball) Chef du Cookie
8 Dough (Ball) roll out Dough Dough (Sheet) Chef du Cookie
9 Dough (Sheet) cut out Cookies Cookies (raw) Chef du Cookie
10 Cookies (raw) bake Cookies (raw) Cookies (baked) Chef du Cookie
11 Tin Factory Tin pack Cookies (baked) in Tin Cookies (boxed) Production Support
Logistic & Procurement
12 Cookies (boxed) deliver Cookies (boxed) Cookies (delivered)
Service
13 test Cookies Test-Result Customer (Child)
14
… and structure it for the important Process‐Steps along the rows: Input ‐ Process ‐ Output

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > SIPOC Technische Universität München
SIPOC: Instructions
1. Start with the Output
Outputs are the results of Activities in the Process-Steps. They can be material Objects (e.g. Cookie) or immaterial (e.g. Order, Decision).
Sometimes for the immaterial Outputs it is not immediately clear, how the Output can be identified and discriminated from the Activity of the Process-Step. The following
guidelines might be helpful.
In the area of Process-Improvement its necessary to work with specific examples to get a realistic idea of the situation.
So at first develop an idea of the Output from a concrete example or even better: take a photo or a screenshot. If you only have a general idea of the Output in mind (e.g.
Management, Information) you might also not be able to specify its Requirements and Problems.
If you visualize at least one concrete example of the Output, you will be able to describe the Output with just one single noun (e.g. Order) or a composite noun (e.g. Shopping-
List). This is important, because now you are able to:
- identify a given class of Outputs (e.g. the class of Shopping-Lists, the class of Orders, the class of Cookies),
- specify the variation of the Outputs within their class (e.g. Cookie salty vs. Cookie sweet) and
- count Outputs (one, two, Cookies).
This is a prerequisite, to later measure the attributes of the Outputs (see below).
In the different development steps of the Process sometimes the same noun is used for the different intermediate Outputs. In this case it is helpful to specify the status in
brackets to discriminate its development steps (e.g. Cookie (raw), Cookie (baked), Cookie (boxed), Cookie (delivered)).
Please specify all intermediate Outputs, between the first Input and the final Output of the Project, order them chronologically and enter them into the Output-Column of your
SIPOC.
2. Specify the Process-Steps

Start with the last Output (bottom right) and identify the upstream Process-Step that leads to this Output.
Please take care, to describe the activity of the Process-Step by using a precise verb (e.g. weigh Ingredients). This will assure that you do can differentiate it from another
Output or an Input.
It is not necessary here to describe the details of the Process. This will be done later in the Process-Mapping-Analysis. Purpose of the SIPOC is to structure the field of the
Project and to identify the most important Inputs, Activities and Outputs.
3. Specify the Input

Each Input of a Process-Step is an Output of an upstream Process-Step. For this please describe the Inputs also with just one single noun (e.g. Tin).
If an intermediate Output becomes the Input of a downstream Process-Step within the SIPOC, you should again write it down to show the flow of the Process.
If several Inputs come into the Process, then try to combine them in just one noun (e.g. Ingredients).
In the Input-Analysis (see below) the Inputs, which result as Outputs from within the SIPOC, will be shown in [brackets] to indicate, that they do not need to be evaluated.
4. Specify Supplier and Customer

Identify the Customer of those Outputs, which are delivered outside the SIPOC - at least the Customer of the Output in the bottom right corner.
Identify the Supplier of those Inputs, which are supplied from outside into the SIPOC - at least the Supplier of the Output in the upper left corner.
(Extract from SigmaGuide)
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Voice to Criticals Technische Universität München
Voice to Criticals: Identify the Requirements of the Customer and the Business, …
Voice of Customer (VoC), Voice of Business (VoB), Critical Requirements (CCR/ CBR), Problems, Risks and CtQ's
In this Chapter
- Demands and Complaints of the Customer (Voice of Customer/ VoC) and Management (Voice of Business/ VoB) are registered,
- VoC and VoB are condensed to Critical Requirements (Critical Customer Requirements (CCR) and Critical Business Requirements (CBR)),
- Problems will be deduced, categorized according to the KANO-Model, the fulfillment of requirements will be evaluated and
- the resulting Severity of each Problem will be calculated.
The Severity of a Problem, not to fulfill a Requirement, determines the criticality of the Requirement (Critical to Quality (CtQ)).
The CtQ's will in the Cause&Effect-Matrix (see below) be further processed as Effects.
The KANO-Model serves to: Customer is ...
- classify the Requirements of the Customer (VOC) and excited delighter
- Identify the critical Requirements (CTQ´s= Critical to Quality), - low carb
assure ecxitement
i.e. Severity of the Outputs Problems. delighter - harmless
excitement Requirement to teeth
There are three categories: - regrowing
1. must be: These are the basic Requirements of the Customer
which have to be fulfilled to assure that the Customer will not more is better more is better
be dissatisfied. performance Requirement - fresh
2. more/ less is better: These are the performance satisfied - inexpensive
prevent Dissatisfaction
Requirements of the Customer which should be as high or as - crumb free
must be
low as possible, depending on the orientation of the scale.
basic Requirement
3. delighter: These are the excitement Requirements, not really
(= Critical To Quality)
necessary, because the Customer does not necessarily expect
them but is positively surprised if given. must be
- delicious
Focus on the must be´s first, because you cannot compensate a - edible
missing must be by other attributes of your Product. angry - chewy
0% Requirement fulfilled to 100%
… the Problems of the Outputs and their Severity
Voice to Criticals: Please answer the questions and …
Y_01
Whose Requirement do you want to specify? Customer Source of Requirement: Customer
Please select an answer.
The Voice to Critical leads Which Output does the the Customer want to evaluate? Cookies (baken) Output: Cookies (baken)
you from the Voice of the Please select an answer.

What does the Customer require from COOKIES (BAKEN)?
Customer (VoC)/ Voice of COOKIES (BAKEN) should
taste like those from Grandma Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand
Business (VoB) to the Outputs Please quote the statement of the Customer.
up to the classification and Which deviation of COOKIES (BAKEN) from the Requirement
don't taste of much Voice of Customer (VoC): Complaint
is problematic for the Customer ?
evaluation of their Problems. Please quote the statement of the Customer.
Which attribute of COOKIES (BAKEN) is addressed in this
taste Attribute of COOKIES (BAKEN): TASTE
It calculates the corresponding Demand and Complaint?
Please enter just one Noun.
Risks and its ranking relative
How should TASTE be according to the Requirement of the Critical Customer Requirement (CCR):
to the Risk of the other Customer?
of chocolate COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE OF CHOCOLATE
Problems. Please enter just one adjective.
Which deviation of TASTE is problematic? insipid Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE INSIPID
The summary at the end of Please enter just one adjective.

each chapter lets you control To which category does the Requirement TASTE OF Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of
Requirement-Category of TASTE: Quality
CHOCOLATE vs. INSIPID belong? Purpose)
the plausibility of your answers
in the context. Which relevance does the Requirement COOKIES (BAKEN)
TASTE OF CHOCOLATE have according to the Kano-Model?
Must-Be Kano-Category of TASTE: Must-Be
Please change your answers, Please select an answer.

How well are the Requirements on TASTE of COOKIES
if the statements of the (BAKEN) actually fulfilled?
90%
Requirement for TASTE of COOKIES (BAKEN)
is fulfilled to: 90%
summary do not make sense. Please enter a value between: 0% - 100%.
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) | Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand: taste like those from Grandma; Complaint: don't taste of much | Critical Customer
Requirement (CCR): COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE OF CHOCOLATE | Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE INSIPID | Requirement-Category of TASTE:
Quality | Kano-Category of TASTE: Must-Be | Requirement for TASTE of COOKIES (BAKEN) is fulfilled to: 90% | The Severity of being unsatisfied with
TASTE of COOKIES (BAKEN) is: 43% (Rank 1/ 3).
… evaluate the summary.

Voice to Criticals: List of all summaries of Voice of Customer and corresponding CTQ´s for Y´s
Summary: Voice of Customer (VoC), Voice of Business (VoB), Critical Requirements

(CCR/ CBR), Problems, Risks and CtQ's
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) | Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand: taste like those from
Grandma; Complaint: taste insipid | Critical Customer Requirement (CCR): COOKIES
(BAKEN) TASTE GOOD | Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE INSIPID | Requirement-
Category of TASTE: Quality | Kano-Category of TASTE: Must-Be | Requirement for TASTE of
COOKIES (BAKEN) is fulfilled to: 90% | The Severity of being unsatisfied with TASTE of
COOKIES (BAKEN) is: 43% (Rank 1/ 3).
Y_02: Output: Cookies (delivered) | Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand: delivery on

requested time; Complaint: delivered too late | Critical Customer Requirement (CCR):
COOKIES (DELIVERED) DELIVERY RELIABLE | Problem: COOKIES (DELIVERED)
DELIVERY 1 HOUR | Requirement-Category of DELIVERY: Availability | Kano-Category of
DELIVERY: More/Less-Is-Better | Requirement for DELIVERY of COOKIES (DELIVERED) is
fulfilled to: 80% | The Severity of being unsatisfied with DELIVERY of COOKIES
(DELIVERED) is: 20% (Rank 2/ 3).
Y_03: Output: Cookies (boxed) | Voice of Business (VoB): Demand: low resource
consumption; Complaint: too much waste of energy and ingredients | Critical Business
Requirement (CBR): COOKIES (BOXED) WASTE OF ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS
MINIMAL | Problem: COOKIES (BOXED) WASTE OF ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS MORE
THAN 10% WASTE | Requirement-Category of WASTE OF ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS:
Resource Consumption | Kano-Category of WASTE OF ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS:
More/Less-Is-Better | Requirement for WASTE OF ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS of
COOKIES (BOXED) is fulfilled to: 90% | The Severity of being unsatisfied with WASTE OF
ENERGY AND INGREDIENTS of COOKIES (BOXED) is: 10% (Rank 3/ 3).
The summaries and the chart might be helpful for your The chart: Y CTQ shows the Outputs with Problems and
storyboard and can serve as an overview the managers their Severity of impacts on the Customer and the Business
The Chart Y CTQ graphically displays the Outputs, Problems and their Severity.

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Project-Charter Technische Universität München
Project Charter: The business card and contract for your Project

Project-Name
Project-Charter Improve taste of Cookies
Business-Case Problem-Statement
Product/ Service: cookie

The Product COOKIE is in focus of the project. COOKIE is a tangible final Output for external Customers and is in the Creation
Process BAKE COOKIES within a year 13 - 52 times created. Important Input of the Process to create of the Product COOKIE is
BUTTER, EGGS, FLOUR, SUGAR, CHOCOLATE, VANILLA.
Process: bake cookies
Voice of Customer (VoC) Problems
The satisfaction of the external customers with the: 1. Problem: COOKIE TASTE INSIPID. COOKIE fulfills the requirement on Quality (is error-free) in 70%.
2. Problem: COOKIE DELIVERY TOO EARLY. COOKIE fulfills the requirement on Availability (just in time) in
- Quality of COOKIE is: 30%.
60%.
3. Problem: COOKIE WASTE OF INGREDIENTS AND ENERGY. COOKIE fulfills the requirement on efficient
- Availability of COOKIE is: 50%.
utilisation of means (no waste of Input, Resources) in 40%.
Voice of Business (VoB) Solution-Ideas
The satisfaction of the Process owners with the Resource Consumption in Creation Process for the Product COOKIE is: 40%.
The Quality costs by reworking are estimated by 100€ / year.
The solution of the Problems is rated as:
- medium URGENT (50%-Level)
- major IMPORTANT (80%-Level)

Comment Comment
In Scope Out of Scope Management

in: Vanilla-Cookies out: bread Sponsor Mrs. Sponsor Supplier
in: Chocolate-Cookies out: chips A_ccountable Mr. Accountable Customer
in: out: A_ccountable ...?
in: out: Controlling ...?

Objectives Date Experts
Y1: Improve taste of Cookies to a grade of 1,5 (customer rating) 15.05.2016 Black-Belt BB Expert
Y2: Deliver ordered Cookies on time (+/1 1h) 15.05.2016 Green-Belt GB Expert
Y3: Reduce resource consumption by 20% 15.05.2016 Green-Belt Master-Black-Belt Reiner
Expert Expert ...?

Date Define Measure Analyse Improve Control* Control End
Target-Date: 01.10.2015 01.11.2015 01.12.2015 15.01.2016 15.02.2016 01.05.2016 15.05.2016
Delivery-Date:
Evaluation: days remaining : 69 days remaining : 100 days remaining : 130 days remaining : 175 days remaining : 206 days remaining : 282 days remaining : 296
Now you can proceed to the MEASURE‐Phase


Measure: From the identification of Influences on the Problem up to the Hypothesis
Identify the negative Influences of the Input (Xi): Input-Analysis Input-Analysis
- Specify the necessary Inputs (Xi) for the Output (Y) Input
- Specify the Requirements for the Inputs (Xi) Requirement

- Classify the Inputs (Xi) to one of the categories of: Quality, Availability and Consumption
- Specify the deviations of the Inputs (Xi) from the Requirements and estimate their probability of occurrence negative Influence and Probability
Identify the negative Influences of the Process (Xp): Process-Mapping & -Analysis Process-Mapping and Analysis
- Map the Process-Steps of the Process leading from the first Input (Xi) to the last Output (Y) and the related departments Process-Step
- Specify the negative Influences (Xp) in the Process-Steps on the Outputs (Y)
Input and Output
- Specify the Inputs (Xi) of the Process-Steps and their Outputs (Y)
- Specify the negative Influences (Xp) of the Process-Steps and estimate their probability of occurrence negative Influence and Probability
Identify the relationships between the Influences (Xi; Xp) on the Problems (Y) (C&E-Matrix) C&E Matrix
Problems (Y)
- Estimate the impact strength of the negative Influences of the Inputs (Xi) on the Problems (Y) Y1 Y2 Y3 Yn
3
- Estimate the impact strength of the negative Influences of the Process-Steps (Xp) on the Problems (Y) Input
(Xi)
Xi1
Xi2 1
- Evaluate the strongest Influences of the Input (Xi) and Process-Steps (Xp) on the Problems (Y) Xin
Xp1 2
4
Process-Steps
- Evaluate the determination of the Problems (Y) by the Influences of Inputs (Xi) and Process-Steps (Xp) (Xp) Xp2
7
5
Xpn
Specify the Variables of the involved Influences (Xi; Xp) and Problems (Y) (Data Collection Plan) Data Collection Plan
- Operationalize the Influences of the Input (Xi), Process-Steps (Xp) and Problems (Y) as measurable Variables
Operationalisation Graphical Display
Y1
Problems
Y2
- Determine the scale level of the Variables, specification limits and targets
(Y)
Yn
Xi1
Input
- Determine measuring-system analysis (if necessary) and sample size (when the statistical Test is determined) (Xi) Xi2
Xin
- Plan graphical representation of the Variables, determine Parameters, Process Capability and Control-Charts
Process- Xp1
Steps Xp2
(Xp) Xpn
Formulate statistical Hypotheses for Influences (Xi; Xp) and related Problems (Y) (Hypothesis) Hypothesis
- Statistical Hypothesis are automatically formulated on the basis of the given information with There is a Difference in
- Relevance of each Hypothesis for the Problem (Risk) the degree of: (Y)
Risk
- Type of the Hypothesis (Difference/ Relationship) and between: Levels of (x)
- a suggestion for an appropriate Statistical Test to examine the Hypothesis Test: ANOVA
Summary MEASURE : Process Capability Index, Control-Charts, Graphical Representation and Hypothesis defined
Outlook ANALYSE: Analyse and Display Variables, test the Hypothesis and find root Causes of Influences (X) on Problems (Y)
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Input-Analysis Technische Universität München
Input Analysis: Identify the Requirements for the Inputs, …
Input-Analysis
In this Chapter we will:

- focus on the Inputs from the SIPOC,
- specify the Requirements for the Inputs,
- collect deviations from the Requirements and
- evaluate the satisfaction with the Input.
In the SIPOC the Process BAKE COOKIES was already structured in its basic Process-Steps.
The Inputs of these Input-Process-Output-Sequences may come from two different sources:
- Inputs from Suppliers, which enter the Process from outside and
- Inputs which result in the course of the Process, as an Output of a preceding Process-Step.
For this Input-Analysis only the external Inputs are relevant. Internal Inputs are seen as Outputs and analysed in the Voice-to-Criticals.
Please note that:

- internal Inputs which result as an Output from a preceding Process-Step , are [ excluded ] in the List-Boxes.
- external Inputs are presented without brackets in the List-Boxes. They should be analysed here.
… their deviation from the Requirement and their probability.

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Input-Analysis Technische Universität München
Input Analysis: Please answer the questions and get an overview …
The Input Analysis leads you xI_01

through all the Inputs which come Which Input is necessary for the Process BAKE COOKIES? Request (Cookie) Input
from outside into the SIPOC. Please select an answer.

Outputs of one Process-Step in the
What do you require from REQUEST (COOKIE)? fits to product line Requirement
SIPOC going as Input into another
Process-Step are represented in Please enter your answer.
[brackets]. To which category does the Requirement FITS TO PRODUCT
Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of Purpose) Requirement-Category
LINE belong?
You do not need to evaluate them
again, because you did it already in Which deviation of REQUEST (COOKIE) from the
does not fit to product line negative Influence
Requirement is problematic for the Process?
the Voice to Criticals.
Please enter your answer.
How often does the negative Influence REQUEST (COOKIE)
Please take care, that you simply DOES NOT FIT TO PRODUCT LINE occur?
5% Probability of Occurrence
enter adjectives in the Require-ment Please enter a value between: 0% - 100%.

field and the corresponding
deviations from Requirement.
The Chart Influence of Xi

graphically displays the Inputs
(Xi) and the probability of their
deviation from Requirements.
This information will be used in
the C&E Matrix as negative
Influences on the Output.
… to the probability of occurrence of negative Influences in the Inputs (Xi).

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Process-Mapping-Analysis Technische Universität München
Process‐Mapping‐Analysis: Specify the flow of Activities in the Process‐Steps, …
Process-Mapping and -Analysis
The Process-Mapping-Analyse serves three purposes:

- The mapping of single Activities gives a more detailed perspective on the Process-Steps than the SIPOC.
- The Analysis of Influences shows Activities with negative impacts on the Outputs.
- The specification of the underlying Inputs, Methods and Resources illustrate the source of the negative Influences in the Activities.
Please detail the Process-Steps of the SIPOC into the overall 25 possible Activities.
1. Go to the first Process-Step (upper left corner of the table).

2. Select the first actor (Supplier/ Customer) of the SIPOC from the list-box.
3. Enter the first Activity of this Supplier into the first empty cell on the right.
- This Activity can but need not be more detailed than in the SIPOC. The challenge here is to find an appropriate level of detail.
- At least the description of the Activity should be so precise that you can identify the negative Influences of the Process-Step.
- Use at least one Verb and one Noun to describe the Activity, like you did it in the SIPOC (e.g. weigh Ingredients).
- Enter only one Activity per column.
4. Select the of the Activity from the list, to indicate the trigger of the Activity.
5. Describe the Method, which guides the execution of the Activity
6. Describe the Resource, by which the Activity is executed.
7. Select the Output from the list below to indicate the result of the Activity.
8. Specify the negative Influence of the Activity on the Output. Use the row:
- Quality, if the Influence has a negative impact on the Quality of the Output.
- Availability, if the Influence has a negative impact on the Quantity/ Time of the Output.
- Consumption, if the Influence has a negative impact on the Consumption of Input and/ or Resources of the Activity.
9. Estimate the probability of occurrence of the negative Influence.
10. Check the notices which eventually show you an error in using the tool.
11. Continue with the next Activity of the Process-Step in the next column to the right.
12. If all Activities of a Process-Step are described, continue with next Process-Step.
13. Select the second Supplier of the SIPOC from the list-box.
14. Enter the first Activity of this Process-Step in the next free column to the right.
15. Continue until all Process-Steps of the SIPOC are adequately described.
… assign their Inputs, Outputs, Methods, Resources and their negative Influences (Xp).

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Process-Mapping-Analysis Technische Universität München
Process Mapping Analysis: Specify the flow of Activities in the Process‐Steps, …

Process-Mapping-Analysis of the Process: bake cookies
Please enter the Activities of the Process-Steps in the format: Verb + Noun (e.g.: weigh Ingredients)
Who does what?
1. Activity 2. Activity 3. Activity 4. Activity 5. Activity
transmit request for

1. Process-Step Customer (Child) Cookies
determine Cookie-Type deliver missing

2. Process-Step Logistic & Procurement Service & Delivery-Date Ingredients
determine necessary &

3. Process-Step Production Support missing Ingredients
preheat the Oven
4. Process-Step Chef du Cookie
5. Process-Step ...?
Which Inputs are necessary to start the

Input: ...? Request (Cookie) Request (Cookie) Shopping-List Start-Signal
Activity?
Methods:
Which Instructions/ Rules direct how to
perform the Activity?
Calendar-Entry Recipe Cooking-Standards The Process Mapping Analysis The Chart Influence of xP
Resources:
Which Personnel and Equipment operates
Mom; Oven
lets you detail all the Process- graphically display the Activities
and supports the Activity?
Steps of the SIPOC into specific (Xp) and the probability of their
Output: Which Output results from the Activity? ...?
Order (Cookie-Type;
Delivery-Date)
Shopping-List Ingredients (complete) ...? Activities. Additionally you can deviation from Requirements.
specify Inputs, Outputs, Methods This information will be used in
the Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of
and Resources.
wrong Cookie-Type wrong Ingredients necessary Ingredients
Which Influences
Purpose) of the Output? determined determined not availabe the C&E Matrix as negative
in the Activities
from the: the Availability (right Quantity just in Order transferred too
The related negative Influences Influences on the Output.
- Methods and
- Resources
Time) of the Output? late
on the Output and their probability
negatively affect:
the Consumption and Waste of Input and/ Oven too early of occurrence prepare the C&E
or Resources? preheated
Anzahl der Abteilungen

Matrix.
Which percentage of the execution of the Acitivity is
20% 5% 10% 5% 5%
overall affected by these negative Influences?
… assign their Inputs, Outputs, Methods, Resources and their negative Influences (Xp).

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > C&E Matrix Technische Universität München
C&E Matrix: filter the important Influences (x) …
C&E Matrix
The C&E Matrix serves to indicate causal relationships between the negative Influences of the Inputs (Xi) and Activities (Xp)
on the Problems of the Output (Y).
1. Within the C&E Matrix every Influence (x) in the rows is contrasted with every Problem (Y) in the columns.
In the xY-intersection cell the strength of each impact can be estimated within a range from 0%-100%.
2. The sum of the impacts of an Influence (x), relativized to its probability of occurrence and the severity of the influenced Problems (Y)
indicates the overall impact strength of each Influence (column U).
3. The rank of each Influence shows its importance in relation to the other Influences and
thus its importance for the subsequent Hypothesis (see below) (column W).
4. The sum of the impacts of all Influences (x) on a Problem (Y), relativized to their probability of occurrence,
indicates the determination of the Problem by its Influences (row 42).
5. The rank of each Problem shows which Problem is relatively strong (high rank) and which Problem is only weakly "explained" by the specified Influences.
This ranking can thus show, where in the Inputs or the Process-Steps additional Influences should be looked for (row 44).
Please evaluate the strength of the presumed impact of the Influences (xI and xP) on the Outputs (Y).
- To do so enter a value between 1 .. 100% in the intersection of the focused cells.
- It does not matter, whether you assume a positive relationship (the greater x, the greater Y) or a negative relationship (the smaller x, the greater Y).
In this tool its a question of the absolute strength of the relationship.
- If there is no relationship at all between an x and an Y, the leave the cell empty.
Result per row: Overall strength of every Influence (x), added up over all Outputs (Y)
Result per column: Determination of every Output (Y) by all Influences (x)
… from the many possible Influences with the help of subject matter experts.
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > C&E Matrix Technische Universität München
C&E Matrix: Specify the impact strength of each negative Influence in the …
Severity 50% 20%
Kano-Category Must-Be More/Less-Is-Better

Results for: Impact of Influences (xI & xP) on the Outputs (Y)
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) | Voice Y_02: Output: Cookies (delivered) |
of Customer (VoC): Demand: taste like Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand:
Output (Y)
those from Grandma; Complaint: don't delivery on requested time; Complaint:
C&E Matrix taste of much | Critical Customer delivered too late | Critical Customer
Requirement (CCR): COOKIES Requirement (CCR): COOKIES
Requirements and (BAKEN) TASTE OF CHOCOLATE | (DELIVERED) DELIVERY RELIABLE |
Problems Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN) TASTE Problem: COOKIES (DELIVERED)
INSIPID | Requirement-Category of DELIVERY 1 HOUR | Requirement-
TASTE: Quality Category of DELIVERY: Availability
Product Sum of the Impact Percentual Impact of each Ranking of the Impact of
of each Influence (xI & xP) Influence (xI & xP) on all each Influence (xI & xP) on
on all Outputs (Y) Outputs (Y) all Outputs (Y)
Input (xI) Probability Rank
xI_01: Input: Request (Cookie) | Requirement: fits to product line | Requirement-Category: Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of
Purpose) | negative Influence: does not fit to product line
5% 2 40% 0,01 2% 5
xI_02: Input: Start-Signal | Requirement: in time | Requirement-Category: Availability (right Quantity just in Time) | negative
Influence: too late
10% 1 80% 0,02 3% 3
xI_03: Input: Tin | Requirement: diameter fits to Cookie size | Requirement-Category: Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of
1% 3 0,00 0% 6
Purpose) | negative Influence: too small or too big
xI_04: ./.
Process-Step (xP) Probability Rank
xP_07: Activity: weigh Ingredients | Input: Ingredients (complete) | Methods: Recipe | Resources: Chef; Scale; Measuring Cup
| Output: Ingredients (weighed) | Influence on Quality: weighed portion of chocolate too low | Influence on Availability: ./. | 30% 2 90% 0,13 22% 2
Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_08: Activity: mix Ingredients & knead the Dough | Input: Ingredients (weighed) | Methods: Recipe | Resources: Chef |
Output: Dough (Ball) | Influence on Quality: Chef eats the already weighed Chocolate (tests the Quality) | Influence on 90% 1 100% 0,45 72% 1
Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_09: Activity: roll out Dough | Input: Dough (Ball) | Methods: Recipe | Resources: Chef; Rolling Pin | Output: Dough (Sheet) |
10% 7 0,00
Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_10: Activity: cut the Cookies | Input: Dough (Sheet) | Methods: Recipe | Resources: Chef; Cookie Cutter | Output: Cookies
30% 2 0,02 2% 4
(raw) | Influence on Quality: cut Cookies in wrong size | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
Product Sum of the Determination of each Output (Y) by the Influences (xI & xP) 1,1445 0,0160 1 100% 1
Results for: Determination of Outputs (Y) by
Percentual Determination of each Output (Y) by the Influences (xI & xP) 97% 1% 100%
Influences (x)
Ranking of the Determination of each Output (Y) by the Influences (xI & xP) 1 2
- The C&E Matrix lets you estimate the impact strength of each Influence on the Problems.
- Every entry in the cells at the intersection of Input, Process-Step (X) and Output (Y)
thus is an assumption about causal relationships between Influence (X) and Problem (Y).
- This is basis for the formulation of Hypothesis.
… Inputs (Xi) and Activities (Xp) on the Problems in the Outputs (Y).

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > C&E Matrix > Chart C&E Heatmap Technische Universität München
C&E Matrix: The Chart C&E Heatmap gives an overview about …

Chart: C&E Heatmap Severity 64% 20% 43% 43% 40% 25% 25%
The Chart C&E Heatmap shows the Risk of each

Y_04: Output: Ingredients (complete) | Y_05: Output: Cookies (baked) | Voice Y_07: Output: Workspace (clean) |
Output (Y) Requirements and

Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand: of Business (VoB): Demand: consume Voice of Business (VoB): Demand: well
Y_03: Output: Cookies (boxed) | Voice contain chocolate and vanilla; little energy; Complaint: too much Y_06: Output: Ingredients (weighed) | cleaned after every baking; Complaint:
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baked) | Voice Y_02: Output: Cookies (delivered) | of Customer (VoC): Demand: fit into the Complaint: ingredient missing | Critical energy consumption | Critical Business Voice of Business (VoB): Demand: be disorder | Critical Business Requirement
The cells indicate the strength of each relationship between influences (xI and xP) and the related of Customer (VoC): Demand: taste like Voice of Customer (VoC): Demand: available tin; Complaint: does not fit into Customer Requirement (CCR): Requirement (CBR): COOKIES according to receipe; Complaint: too (CBR): WORKSPACE (CLEAN)
Influence x Problem relationship.
Problems
Outputs (Y) as Risks (Probability x Severity). those from Grandma; Complaint: delivery on requested time; Complaint: the tin | Critical Customer Requirement INGREDIENTS (COMPLETE) (BAKED) ENERGY CONSUMPTION much waste | Critical Business ORDNUNG UND SAUBERKEIT ORDER
The Risks are the basis for the prioritizing of the corresponding Hypothesis between x and Y. Cookies taste insipid | Critical Customer delivered too late | Critical Customer (CCR): COOKIES (BOXED) FITTING COOKING RECIPE CONFORMITY MINIMAL | Problem: COOKIES Requirement (CBR): INGREDIENTS AND CLEANLINESS | Problem:
Requirement (CCR): COOKIES Requirement (CCR): COOKIES ACCORDING TO TOLERANCES | GIVEN | Problem: INGREDIENTS (BAKED) ENERGY CONSUMPTION (WEIGHED) WASTE AS LOW AS WORKSPACE (CLEAN) ORDNUNG
(Nothing has to be entered here)
(BAKED) TASTE SWEET | Problem: (DELIVERED) DELIVERY RELIABLE | Problem: COOKIES (BOXED) FITTING (COMPLETE) COOKING RECIPE MORE THAN 10% WASTE | POSSIBLE | Problem: INGREDIENTS UND SAUBERKEIT DISORDERED AND
COOKIES (BAKED) TASTE INSIPID Problem: COOKIES (DELIVERED) TOO BIG (AND TOO SMALL) | CONFORMITY INGREDIENT MISSING Requirement-Category of ENERGY (WEIGHED) WASTE MORE THAN 10% DIRTY WORKSPACE | Requirement-
OR SALTY | Requirement-Category of DELIVERY 1 HOUR | Requirement- Requirement-Category of FITTING: | Requirement-Category of COOKING CONSUMPTION: Resource WASTE | Requirement-Category of Category of ORDNUNG UND
TASTE: Quality Category of DELIVERY : Availability Quality RECIPE CONFORMITY: Quality Consumption WASTE: Resource Consumption SAUBERKEIT: Resource Consumption
Input (xI) Probability D E F G H I J
xI_01: Input: Wishes | Requirement: complete | Requirement-Category: Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of Purpose) |
negative Influence: incomplete and intransparent
80% 8,29%
The Risk-Value combines the:
- Probability of occurrence of each Influence,
xI_02: Input: Start-Signal | Requirement: given in time | Requirement-Category: Availability (right Quantity just in Time) |
20% 0,63%
negative Influence: given too late or too early
xI_03: Input: Tin | Requirement: right size and airtight | Requirement-Category: Quality (Faultlessness/ Fulfilment of Purpose) |
5% 1,66%
- Strength of its impact on the Problem and

negative Influence: too small
xI_04: ./. 0%
xI_05: ./. 0%
- Severity of the Problem.
xI_06: ./. 0%
xI_07: ./. 0%
xI_08: ./. 0%
The colors illustrate the relative degree of the Risk:
xI_09: ./. 0%
- red: high Risk for triggering the Problem
xI_10: ./. 0%
- yellow: medium
- green: low Risk for triggering the Problem.
xI_11: ./. 0%
xI_12: ./. 0%
xI_13: ./. 0%
xI_14: ./. 0%
Thus the cells with xY-Relations with their Risk, the

number, the location and dispersion give an overview
xI_15: ./. 0%
xI_16: ./. 0%
Process-Step (xP)
xP_01: Activity: transmit wishes | Input: ./. | Methods: ./. | Resources: ./. | Output: ./. | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on
Probability
about the relevance of the Hypothesis (see below).
0%
xP_02: Activity: determine Cookie-Type & Preparation-Date | Input: Wishes | Methods: Calendar-Entry | Resources: ./. |
20% 3,32% 0,56%
Output: Order | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_03: Activity: determine necessary & missing Ingredients | Input: ./. | Methods: Receipt | Resources: ./. | Output: Shopping-
75% 2,70% 3,60% 0,42%
List | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_04: Activity: deliver missing Ingredients | Input: Shopping-List | Methods: ./. | Resources: ./. | Output: Ingredients
15% 1,49% 1,00% 0,23%
(complete) | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_05: Activity: prepare Workplace & preheat the Oven | Input: Start-Signal | Methods: Cooking-Standards | Resources:
Mom; Oven | Output: Workspace (clean) | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: wrong date of start signal | 5% 1,38% 0,69%
Influence on Resource Consumption: Oven too early preheated
xP_06: Activity: collect specified Ingredients | Input: Ingredients (complete) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef | Output: ./.
5% 1,99% 0,66%
| Influence on Quality: expiry date exceeded | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_07: Activity: weigh Ingredients | Input: ./. | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; Kitchen Balance; Measuring Cup | Output:
Ingredients (weighed) | Influence on Quality: forgot sugar | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: 50% 5,81% 1,07%
./.
xP_08: Activity: mix Ingredients & knead to Dough | Input: Ingredients (weighed) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; |
10% 0,64%
Output: Dough (Ball) | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_09: Activity: roll out Dough | Input: Dough (Ball) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; Rolling Pin | Output: Dough (Sheet)
30%
| Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_10: Activity: cut the Cookies | Input: Dough (Sheet) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; Cookie Cutter | Output: Cookies
10% 2,14%
(raw) | Influence on Quality: forgot to stamp | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_11: Activity: place Cookies on Baking Tray | Input: Cookies (raw) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; Baking Tray |
5%
Output: ./. | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_12: Activity: push Baking Tray into the Oven | Input: Cookies (raw) | Methods: ./. | Resources: Chef; Baking Tray; Oven |
3%
Output: ./. | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_13: Activity: set Timer | Input: Cookies (raw) | Methods: Receipt | Resources: Chef; Timer | Output: ./. | Influence on
80% 6,91% 0,76%
Quality: wrong time interval | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_14: Activity: get Baking Tray out of the Oven | Input: Cookies (raw) | Methods: ./. | Resources: Chef; Baking Tray; Oven |
1%
Output: Cookies (baked) | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_15: Activity: pack Cookies in Tin | Input: Tin | Methods: ./. | Resources: Chef | Output: Cookies (boxed) | Influence on
25% 0,30%
Quality: Cookies too big for Tin | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_16: Activity: deliver Cookies | Input: ./. | Methods: ./. | Resources: ./. | Output: Cookies (delivered) | Influence on Quality:
5%
./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_17: Activity: test Cookie | Input: ./. | Methods: ./. | Resources: ./. | Output: ./. | Influence on Quality: ./. | Influence on
0%
xP_18: Activity: ask for Customer-Satisfaction | Input: ./. | Methods: ./. | Resources: ./. | Output: Test-Result | Influence on
0%
Quality: ./. | Influence on Availability: ./. | Influence on Resource Consumption: ./.
xP_19: ./. 0%
xP_20: ./. 0%
… number, dispersion and relevance of causal relationships between Influences and Problems
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Measurement Technische Universität München
Excursion to theory of measurement: scales and their statistical parameters
differentiation and example of of example from work example for parameters of parameters of
type of attribute values scale
order of values everyday life environment Cookies central tendency scattering
types of Cookies:
gender: - chocolate
male/ female - vanilla number of different
types of different: - values in sample/
- products
qualitative attributive different categories Nominal Scale Mode number of different
- errors
types of errors: possible values in
- locations
election success: - burnt population
parties/ persons/ - salty
-
grades/ marks: complexity of

rating of taste:
ABCDEF/ projects:
****
123456 project X > project Y
rank order between Range,
discrete different values of Ordinal Scale Median Percentiles,
the attribute Interquartile Range
satisfaction FMEA Risk-Priority-
Risk of a Problem:
assessment: Number (RPN):
0% - 100%
**** 1 - 1000
quantitative
fuel consumption: length: cm

Liters cycle time: hours weight of Cookies:
same intervals
- gram (g)
between different Average Deviation,
Mean
continuous values of the Cardinal Scale Standard Deviation,
processing time of (Xbar)
attribute and natural Variance
Cookies:
zero point race duration: costs: $/ €/ £/ ¥/ ... - minutes (min)
hours : minutes : profit: $/ €/ £/ ¥/ ...
The higher the scale level of a measurement, the more information is carried by the data
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Data Collection Plan Technische Universität München
Data Collection Plan: Operationalize the measurement of the variables Y, Xi and Xp …
Data Collection Plan
In the Data Collection Plan the Outputs (Y), Influences of the Inputs (Xi) and the Processes (Xp) are operationalised.
In this Chapter you can determine the:

- subject for the measurement (What should be measured?)
- measurand and the unit of measurement (e.g. Time (hrs.))
- target and specification limits
- scale level of the data (Nominal-, Ordinal- and Cardinal-Scale)
- Type of data collection (collect new or existing data)
- decision whether a Measurement-System-Analysis should be executed or not
- conditions and circumstances, which should be additionally collected? (Blocking-/ Condition-Variables)
- sample size
(can reasonable be calculated with the procedure: Power & Sample Size only after the determination of the statistical test (see Hypothesis))
- location and source of data collection
- time interval in which the data should be collected (eventually with a start- and end-date of measurement)
- name of the variables in the data collection table
- name of the data collection table
- responsible persons for the data collection
On the basis of the scale level recommendations are given for:

- Graphical Representation
- Parameter of Central Tendency
- Dispersion Parameter
- Process-Capability
- Control-Charts
- Test of one Sample vs. Limit/ Target
With these information all requirements are given to form statistical Hypothesis.
In the next chapter you will find a list of automatically formulated Hypothesis with recommended Statistical Tests for their examination.
… and follow the recommendations for their first analysis

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Data Collection Plan Technische Universität München
Data Collection Plan: Operationalize the measurement of the variables Y, Xi and Xp …

Data Collection Plan please answer the questions and plan the graphical Dispaly and first Analysis of the Variables (x/Y) according to the recommendations (see right ->)
The Data Collection Plan lists all
Ranking of Influences (xI & xP)
specified Outputs (Y) and their

Influences (Xi and Xp together with the
und Outputs (Y)
Which different values can Will it be necessary to

How should the Data be
Influences (xI & xP) und Outputs (Y) What should be measured? Measurand & Unit Target & Specification-Limits the Measurand take? (Scale
of Data)
collected?
conduct a Measurement-
System-Analysis? ranking of their relevance.
The task is to operationalize the related

Output (Y) variables and prepare them for the
1
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) | Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN)
TASTE INSIPID
taste
rating of taste (Scale from 1-
10)
grade 8 or higher
Data Rank Ordered (Ordinal-
collect new data no
measurement.
Scale)
Recommendations for first Analysis:

This means to transfer the subject of
measurement into measurands and
Which Data about the
specify the variables, i.e. the:
circumstances should
How large should the Sample
Where should the Data be For which Time Interval Which Variable-Name will
In which File will the Data be Who is responsible for the - subject of measurement
additionally be collected? collected? (Location/ should the Data be you assign to the
(Blocking-/ Condition-
Size be?
Source) collected? (Start/ End) Measurand?
stored? collection of the data?
- measurand and its
Variables)
- scale level
- sample size
- type of Data Collection and the
Cookie-Taste (Vanilla vs.
- conditions of measurement
50 location of Customer 1 month Y_Taste Cookie_du_Chef.xlsx Green Belt
Chocolate - responsible persons
Graphical Representation
Parameter of Central
Tendency
Dispersion
Parameter
Process-Capability Control-Charts Test of one Sample vs. Limit/ Target As a result some recommendations are
given to their graphical display and first
Pp/ Ppk; Cp/ Cpk / Z-Wert (Sigma-
X-bar/ R-Chart (if n_total > 80 and

Error-Bar-Chart/ Interval-Diagram
X-bar/ S-Chart (if n_total > 80 and
Chi-Square goodness-of-fit-Test
analysis.
Time-Series-Chart/ Run-Chart/
Error Rate/ DPU/ ppm/ z-Value
1P-Test (Percentage vs. Limit/
t-Test (Mean vs. Limit/ Target)

(Percentage vs. Limit/ Target)
Standard Deviation/ Variance
DPO/ DPMO/ z-Value (Sigma-
Variance-Test (Variance vs.

if n_subsamples <= 8)
p-Chart (if ok vs. ko is
p-Chart (if ok vs. ko is

I/ MR-Chart (if N < 80)
if n_subsamples > 8)
discriminated)
discriminated)
(Sigma-Level)
Limit/ Target)
Pareto-Chart
Line-Chart
Histogram
Box-Plot
Quartile
Median
Target)
Modus
Level)
Level)
Mean
200,00% 200,00% 100,00% 100,00% 100,00% 200,00% 100,00% 200,00% 200,00% 200,00% 200,00% 200,00% 200,00% 200,00%
… and follow the recommendations for the first analysis of these variables

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Hypothesis Technische Universität München
Observations of the reality are modelled as Hypothesis about Relationships or Differences …
format of the statistical examination
H0 HA
modeled observation
There is no relationship between x and Y according to: There is a relationship between x and Y according to:
- If (x), then (Y). - If (x), then (Y).
- The (x), the (Y). - The (x), the (Y).
Relationship
Example
There is a/no relationship between x and Y according to:
- If the temperature of oven is (too) high (x), then the Cookie is burnt (Y).
- The higher the temperature of the oven (x), the darker the Cookie (Y).
statistical formulation
rxY = 0 rxY 0
modeling of the
observations modeled observation
There is no Difference There is a Difference

- in the degree of: Y - in the degree of: Y
- between the Levels of: x (xi, xj, ...) - between the Levels of: x (xi, xj, ...)
Difference
Example
There is a/ no Difference
- in: the weight of Cookies (Y)
- between: Types of Cookies (x) (e.g. Vanilla vs. Chocolate vs. ...)
statistical formulation
Yi = Yj Yi Yj
… and formally split into the Hypothesis H0 vs. HA for their statistical examination
Selection of the appropriate Statistical Test for the examination of Hypothesis …
Y
Data in 2 Levels Data in > 2 Levels Data Rank Ordered Data discrete or continuous
(Nominal-Scale) (Nominal-Scale) (Ordinal-Scale) (Cardinal-Scale)
Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Difference Hypothesis Difference Hypothesis
Data in 2 Levels
(Nominal-Scale) Chi-Square-Test Chi-Square-Test Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-Test t-Test
Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Difference Hypothesis Difference Hypothesis

Data in > 2 Levels
(Nominal-Scale) Chi-Square-Test Chi-Square-Test Kruskal-Wallis-Test ANOVA
x Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis

Data Rank Ordered
Rank Correlation (Spearman)
(Ordinal-Scale) Binary-Logistic-Regression Nominal-Logistic-Regression Rank Correlation (Spearman)
/ Ordinal-Logistic-Regression
Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis Relationship Hypothesis

Data discrete or continuous Product-Moment-Correlation
Rank Correlation (Spearman)
(Cardinal-Scale) Binary-Logistic-Regression Nominal-Logistic-Regression (Pearson) / General
/ Ordinal-Logistic-Regression
Regression
… in the dependence of the Scale of the involved Variables (x and Y)

Hypothesis: Automatically formulated (univariate) Hypothesis for Y and Xi and Xp …
Hypothesis
In this Chapter we will:

- summarize the most important information from the DEFINE- and MEASURE-Phase and formulate Hypothesis.
These Hypothesis are based on:

- the xY-pairings of the C&E Matrix,
- the information from the Data Collection Plan and
- the prioritization by the related Risks from the C&E Heatmap.
To sort the Hypothesis in a consecutive order please press: Ctrl + s
1. Risk Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-scale (school grades) ]
There is a/ no Difference in the degree of: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-scale (school grades) ] between the Levels of: xI_01: Input: Request (Cookie) [
1,99% Levels of: Cookie-Type (Vanilla- vs. Chocolate-Cookies) ] .
Difference Hypothesis Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney-Test/ t-Test
There is a/ no Relationship between: xP_07: Activity: weigh Ingredients [ Degree of: Chocolate weight (grams/ g) ] and: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-
8,67% scale (school grades) ] according to the Principle: The larger the value of x, the larger (resp. smaller) is the value of Y.
Relationship Hypothesis Rank Correlation (Spearman)/ Ordinal-Logistic-Regression/ General Regression
There is a/ no Difference in the degree of: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-scale (school grades) ] between the Levels of: xP_08: Activity: mix Ingredients
14,43% & knead the Dough [ Levels of: Chef ate chocolate from weighed portion (yes vs. no) ] .
… together with their Risk to cause a Problem and the recommended Statistical Tests


ANALYSE: From the identification of Problems (Y) to the Project charter
Evaluate collected data graphically Histogram Pareto-Diagram
- Check plausibility of the collected data and identify/ eliminate invalid data
Summary Report for Yt1_Cookie-Weight
Pareto Chart of Y_Type_of_Cookie-Problem
Anderson-Darling Normality Test
A-Squared 0,22 50
P-Value 0,832
100
Mean 20,951
StDev 2,333
Variance 5,444 40
Y_Problem -Frequency
Skewness -0,163107 80
Kurtosis -0,148408
N 60
- Display the data graphically, e.g. Histogram, Pareto-Diagram (see the recommendations in the Data Collection Plan)
Minimum 15,048 30
Percent
1st Quartile 19,398 60
Median 20,899
3rd Quartile 22,591
Maximum 26,172
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
20 40
20,348 21,553
95% Confidence Interval for Median
15 18 21 24 20,260 21,716 10 20
95% Confidence Interval for StDev
1,978 2,846
0 0
Y_Type_of_Cookie-Problem te ce m ts or gh
t cy er
as an or en ol ei en th
_T st _F di _C O
Q ub Q re Q _W sist
95% Confidence Intervals Y_ _S Y_ ng Y_ Q on
_I Y_ _C
Y _Q Y_
Q Q
Mean Y_
Y_Problem-Frequency 16 8 5 5 4 4 3 2
Median Percent 34,0 17,0 10,6 10,6 8,5 8,5 6,4 4,3
20,4 20,7 21,0 21,3 21,6 21,9
Cum % 34,0 51,1 61,7 72,3 80,9 89,4 95,7 100,0
Calculate Process Capability and Process Performance over time Process Capability Control Chart
- Calculate Process Capability, e.g. Pp/ Ppk, Sigma Level (see the recommendations in the Data Collection Plan)
Process Capability Report for Yt1_Cookie-Weight I-MR Chart of Y_Consumption_per_Day
Summary Report
Is the process mean stable? Comments
Evaluate the % of out-of-control points.
LSL Target USL The process mean may not be stable. 5 (15,6%) data points are out of control
0% > 5% on the I chart. Keep in mind that you may see 0,7% out-of-control points by
Process Data Overall chance, even when the process is stable.
LSL 18 Within
Target 20 Yes No
USL 22 Overall Capability 15,6%
Sample Mean 20,9507 Z.Bench 0,18
Sample N 60 Z.LSL 1,26
StDev(Overall) 2,33315 Z.USL 0,45
- Display Process Performance over time, e.g. I/ MR Chart (see the recommendations in the Data Collection Plan)
StDev(Within) 2,04775 Ppk 0,15
Cpm 0,26
Potential (Within) Capability Individual and Moving Range Charts
Z.Bench 0,31 Investigate any out-of-control points.
Z.LSL 1,44 25 U CL=23,92
Z.USL 0,51
Individual Value
Cpk 0,17
10 _
X=5,89
-5
LCL= -12,13
U CL=22,14
20
Moving Range
10
15,0 16,5 18,0 19,5 21,0 22,5 24,0 25,5 __
MR=6,78
Performance
Observed Expected Overall Expected Within 0 LCL= 0
PPM < LSL 100000,00 102992,26 74799,56 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
PPM > USL 266666,67 326450,62 304179,60
PPM Total 366666,67 429442,89 378979,15 N: 32 Mean: 5,8947 StDev(within): 6,0087 StDev(overall): 4,0946
Control limits are estimated using the StDev(within).
Test Hypothesis Difference Relationship
- Select the Hypothesis with the highest Risks of Problems (see the Risks in the Hypothesis) 27,5
Boxplot of Y_Cookie_Weight
22
20
Scatterplot of Y_Brightness_of_Cookie vs x_Baking_Time
- Test the selected Hypotheses (see the recommended Statistical Tests in the Hypothesis)
25,0
Y_Brightness_of_Cookie
18
Y_Cookie_Weight
22,5
16
20,0
14
- Prioritize the Problems (Yi) by Difference Hypothesis

17,5 12
10
15,0
t_1 t_2 10 12 14 16 18 20
time_of_measurement x_Baking_Time
- Identify chains of causation (x1 > x2 > xn > ) by Relationship Hypothesis
Identify Root Causes Fault-Tree
- If root causes could already be identified by the Tests of Relationship Hypothesis, got to IMPROVE
- Identify root causes of Influences (x) of Problems (Y) by Fault-Tree-Analysis
Summary ANALYSE: Root Causes (x) of Problems (Y) identified

Outlook IMPROVE: develop Solutions to eliminate, adjust or circumvent Root Causes
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Evaluate collected data graphically Technische Universität München
Distribution of data of Taste, related Statistical Parameter and a Time Series Plot
Summary Report for Y_Cookie-Taste Time Series Plot of Y_Cookie-T by x_Cookie-T

Summary Report
Anderson-Darling Normality Test
2. A-Squared 8,74
1. P-Value <0,005 1. Data in Time Order
Compare patterns and trends across samples.
Mean 3,2200 Variable
StDev 1,4976 6 Chocolate
Variance 2,2428 Vanilla
Skewness 0,42510
Kurtosis -1,00065
5
N 200
Minimum 1,0000
1st Quartile 2,0000
Median 3,0000 4
Y_Cookie-T
3rd Quartile 4,0000
Maximum 6,0000
95% Confidence Interval for Mean 3
3,0112 3,4288
95% Confidence Interval for Median
1 2 3 4 5 6 2,0000 3,0000 2
95% Confidence Interval for StDev
1,3638 1,6607
3. 1
1 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Index
2.
Chocolate Vanilla
4. 95% Confidence Intervals
Mean
Median
2,00 2,25 2,50 2,75 3,00 3,25 3,50
1. Distribution of the Taste Ratings in a Histogram with a corresponding 1. Time Series of the Taste Ratings, grouped in an overlay for the
normal curve Vanilla- and the Chocolate-Cookies
2. Anderson-Darling Normality Test shows a significant result (p< 2. Time Series of the Taste Ratings, grouped separately for the Vanilla-
0,005), meaning: data are not normally distributed. Additionally and the Chocolate-Cookies
important statistics are shown: Mean, Standard Deviation, Median, The course of data shows, that the rating of Vanilla-Cookies is relatively
3. Box-Plot of the Distribution (the Histogram seen “from above”) homogenous over time varying around the value of 2, while the rating of
4. Confidence Intervals for the Mean and Median. It means, that with a the Chocolate-Cookies varies in a range from 2 to 6. This different
probability of 95% the Mean/ Median in the population will be within course of ratings is the cause for the peak at 2 in the Histogram.
this range.
The Time Series Plot shows that the Taste of Chocolate‐Cookies (Y) decreases over time
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Process Capability Technische Universität München
Process Capability: Calculate the capability of your Process for …
Calculation of Process Capability based on Units, Defectc and Opportunities for Defects
Definitions Symbol Enter Your Data The Process Capability can be calculated if:
Units U 1.000.000
Defects D 3,40
Opportunities for a defect O 1 - Data are nominally scaled, if you know the number of units and
Number of operation steps m defects then you can calculate:
defect Units Symbol Calculation Result
Defects per Unit DPU D/ U 0,0000034
Binomial Capability with Yield, DPU, ppm, Sigma Level
Defect Parts per Million PPM D/ U x 10^6 3,40
Defects per Unit
Total Opportunity TOP UxO 1.000.000
- Data are nominally scaled, if you know the number of units,
Defects per Unit Opportunity DPO DPU/ O 0,0000034 defects and the opportunities for defect, then you can calculate:
Defects per million Opportunity DPMO DPO x 10^6 3,4000000 Poisson Capability with Yield, DPMO, Sigma Level
without consideration of the Opportunities
Yield (%) (1- DPU)* 100 99,9996600
Defect (%) 100 - Yield 0,0003400
Sigma Level (Data from short-term study) Sigma z-Value 4,50
Sigma Level (Data from long-term study) Process-Sigma z-Value + 1,5 6,00
with consideration of the Opportunities
Yield (%) (1- DPO)* 100 99,9996600
Defect (%) 100 - Yield 0,0003400
Sigma Level (Data from short-term study) Sigma z-Value 4,50
Sigma Level (Data from long-term study) Process-Sigma z-Value + 1,5 6,00
Conversion of percentual Yield portions (area of the Normal Distribution) in corresponding z-Values (Sigma-Level) - Data are given as percentage values, then you can converse
Enter Your Data Sigma Yield (%) them into z-Values (Sigma Level)
Conversion: Sigma - Yield 6,00 99,99999980268%
6,00 99,99999980268%
- Data are given as z-Values (Sigma Level), then you can
Sigma Yield (%) converse them into percentage values
Conversion: Process-Sigma - Yield 7,50 99,99999980268%
7,50 99,99999980268%
Calculation: Pp/ Ppk and Sigma Level - Data are cardinally scaled, specification limits are given then
Parameter Enter Your Data z-Transformation Area from minus infinity to value (in%)
you can calculate the Pp/ Ppk Capability Index and the
Lower Specification Limit (LSL) -6,00 -6,00 0,00000009866% corresponding z-Values (Sigma Levels)
Upper Specification Limit (USL) 6,00 6,00 99,99999990134%
Mean 0,00 0,00 50,00000000000%
Standard Deviation 1,00 1,00
Area between Upper Specification
Sigma Pp Limit and Mean
6,00 2 99,99999990134%
Area between Mean and Lower
Process-Sigma Ppk Specification Limit
7,50 2 99,99999990134%
… nominal scaled values, percent values and cardinal scaled values
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Process Capability Technische Universität München
Process‐Capability: How good is the Taste of the critical Chocolate‐Cookies (Y)
Capability Analysis for Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste

Summary Report
The Process Capability Analysis shows:
2. How capable is the process? 1.
0 6
Upper spec
Customer Requirements
4
1. The Customer Requirements are defined as Specification Limits on
Z potential = 0,03
Low High
Target
Lower spec
1,5
*
the rating scale of taste:
Z actual = 0,01
- Upper specification limit (USL): 4 (see Data Collection Plan)
Process Characterization (Taste should not be rated worse than 4:= adequate)
4. Does the process mean differ from 1,5?
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5
Mean
Standard deviation (overall)
3,98
1,6452 - Target: 1,5 (see Data Collection Plan
Yes No 3. Actual (overall) capability (The Mean of Rating of taste should be 1,5:= very good/ good)
Pp *
P < 0,001
Ppk 0,00
Z.Bench 0,01
% Out of spec
PPM (DPMO)
49,52
495150
2. The Z-Values indicate the actual and the potential Process Capability.
Actual (Overall) Capability - Z actual= actual Sigma Level= 0,01
Are the data below the limit and close to the target?
5. Target USL - Z potential= potential Sigma Level= 0,03
Comments
• The process mean differs significantly from the target (p < 0,05). (the rating of taste of Cookies is far away from a Level of 6 Sigma)
• The defect rate is 49,52%, which estimates the percentage of parts
from the process that are outside the spec limits.
Actual (overall) capability is what the customer experiences. 3. Different Parameter of Process Capability:
Potential (within) capability is what could be achieved if process shifts
and drifts were eliminated.
- Pp (Process performance) and Ppk (Pp „katayori“ (:= centre))
- Z.Bench
- % out of specification
- PPM / DPMO
These parameter focus on different aspects of Process Capability
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
4. The (one-sample-t-) Test indicates a significant difference between

Because the Rating data are not normal distributed, the statements the Mean of the rating of taste (= 3,98) and the target (= 1,5). We can
about Process Capability should be interpreted with caution. conclude, that our next Cookies would also not achieve the target, if
we do not change the process.
But we are sure, that we have to improve the taste at least of the
Chocolate-Cookies. 5. The Histogram shows a bimodal distribution and the Anderson-Darling
normality test (not shown here) indicates a significant result, meaning
The bimodal distribution with the two peaks indicates, that there that the data for the Chocolate-Cookies are also not normally
were already conditions for a better Process Capability. distributed. This means: interpretation of Results under reserve
Focus is now on the difference of Taste between Chocolate‐ vs. Vanilla‐Cookies (Y)
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Test of Hypothesis Technische Universität München
1. Hypothesis: There is a difference in Taste (Y) between Cookie‐Types (x)
There is a/ no Difference in the degree of: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-scale (school grades) ] between the Levels of: xI_01: Input: Request (Cookie) [
1,99% Levels of: Cookie-Type (Vanilla- vs. Chocolate-Cookies) ] .
2-Sample t Test for Y_Cookie-Taste by x_Cookie-Type

Summary Report
The tests of the Hypothesis with the t-Tests shows:
1. Do the means differ?

2. Individual Samples 1. significant difference in the rated Taste between Vanilla-Cookies vs.
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5 Statistics Chocolate Vanilla
Sample size 100 100 the Chocolate-Cookies (p < 0,001)
Yes No Mean 3,98 2,46
P < 0,001 95% CI (3,654; 4,306) (2,3019; 2,6181)
Standard deviation 1,6452 0,79671
The mean of Chocolate is significantly different from the mean of
Vanilla (p < 0,05).
2. Statistics for the Taste of the two Types of Cookies:
Difference Between Samples - Vanilla: N= 100, Mean/ xbar= 2,46, s= 0,796
3. Statistics *Difference
- Chocolate: N= 100, Mean/ xbar= 3,98, s= 1,645
Difference 1,52
4. 95% CI for the Difference
Is the entire interval above or below zero?
95% CI (1,1587; 1,8813)
*Difference = Chocolate - Vanilla

3. Difference between the Means in the sample (- 1,52) and the
Comments
corresponding Confidence-Interval (CI= - 1,8813; -1,1587) for the
• Test: You can conclude that the means differ at the 0,05 level of
0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 significance.
• CI: Quantifies the uncertainty associated with estimating the difference in
population **
means from sample data. You can be 95% confident that the true difference
is between 1,1587 and 1,8813.
• Distribution of Data: Compare the location and means of samples. Look
5. Distribution of Data
Compare the data and means of the samples. for unusual data before interpreting the results of the test. 4. The Interval Diagram plots the Difference between the Means as well
Chocolate
as the Confidence-Interval
Vanilla
5. The two Histograms show the distribution of the rating data, with their
Means and the related Confidence-Intervals of the Means.
1 2 3 4 5 6 Data are not normally distributed; interpretation of Results under reserve
The t-Test shows, that there is a significant difference of 1,52 grades on the Rating-Scale of Taste.
Our Customer likes the Vanilla-Cookies better than the Chocolate-Cookies. We the Chocolate-Cookies have a Problem!
Focus is now on the negative influences (x) on the Taste of Chocolate‐Cookies (Y)
2. Hypothesis: There is a relationship between the amount of chocolate (x) and the rating of taste (Y)
There is a/ no Relationship between: xP_07: Activity: weigh Ingredients [ Degree of: Chocolate weight (grams/ g) ] and: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-
8,67% scale (school grades) ] according to the Principle: The larger the value of x, the larger (resp. smaller) is the value of Y.
Relationship Hypothesis Rank Correlation (Spearman)/ Ordinal-Logistic-Regression/ General Regression
Regression for Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste vs x_Chocolate-Weight_pre

Y: Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste
Summary Report The tests of the Hypothesis with the Regression Analysis shows:
X: x_Chocolate-Weight_pre
1. Is there a relationship between Y and X? 2.

Fitted Line Plot for Linear Model
Y = 6,433 - 0,5653 X 1. a significant relationship between the weight of chocolate in the
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5
6
Cookies and the rating of their Taste (p < 0,001)
Yes No
Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste
P < 0,001
The relationship between Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste and 4
2. The Fittet Line Plot (Scatter Plot) shows a linear relationship between
x_Chocolate-Weight_pre is statistically significant (p < 0,05).
the weight of chocolate in the Cookies (x) and the rating of the Taste
of these Cookie according to the linear regression equation:
2
3. % of variation explained by the model
Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste= 6,433 - 0,5653 x weight of chocolate in
0% 100% Cookie (The more chocolate the better the rating of taste)
0,0 2,5 5,0 7,5 10,0
Low High x_Chocolate-Weight_pre
R-sq = 96,51%
96,51% of the variation in Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste can be explained by the
Comments 3. The strength of the relationship between weight of chocolate and
regression model. The fitted equation for the linear model that describes the
relationship between Y and X is:
Taste is expressed by R-square/ R2 (Determination-Coefficient).
Y = 6,433 - 0,5653 X
If the model fits the data well, this equation can be used to predict In this Example 96,51% of the variation of the rating of Taste can be
Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste for a value of x_Chocolate-Weight_pre, or find
4. Correlation between Y and X
the settings for x_Chocolate-Weight_pre that correspond to a desired explained by the variation in chocolate weight, i.e.: the weight of
value or range of values for Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste.
-1
Perfect Negative
0
No correlation
1
Perfect Positive A statistically significant relationship does not imply that X causes Y.
chocolate is a strong determinant of the rating of Taste.
-0,98
The negative correlation (r = -0,98) indicates that when 4. The negative correlation of r= -0,98 (r2= 96%, see 3.) confirms the
x_Chocolate-Weight_pre increases, Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste tends to
decrease. negative relationship in the regression equation and the Fitted Line
Plot: the higher the value of x, the lower (better) the value of Y
The Regression-Analysis shows, that there is a significant and very strong relationship between the amount of chocolate in a Chocolate-
Cookie and the rating of its taste: the more the better – within the investigated range of chocolate weight.
Our Customer likes the chocolate in the Chocolate-Cookies. Why y does the amount chocolate in the Chocolate-Cookies vary?
y
Focus is now on the influences on the variation of chocolate (x) in Chocolate‐Cookies (Y)
Hypothesis: There is a difference in the weight of chocolate in a Cookie (Y)
between the conditions the Chef eats the already weighed chocolate vs. not (x)
There is a/ no Difference in the degree of: Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) [ Ranking Position of: rating-scale (school grades) ] between the Levels of: xP_08: Activity: mix Ingredients
14,43% & knead the Dough [ Levels of: Chef ate chocolate from weighed portion (yes vs. no) ] .
2-Sample t Test for Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste by x_Test_of_Chocolate

Summary Report The tests of the Hypothesis with the t-Tests shows:

2. Individual Samples
1. significant difference in the Taste of the Chocolate-Cookies between
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5 Statistics no yes
Sample size 20 80 the conditions: Chef tests (eats) chocolate: yes vs. no (p < 0,001)
Yes No Mean 1,5 4,6
P < 0,001 95% CI (1,260; 1,740) (4,3384; 4,8616)
The mean of no is significantly different from the mean of yes (p <
0,05). 2. Statistics for the two Test Conditions:
Difference Between Samples - Test no: N= 20, Mean/ xbar= 1,5, s= 0,51299
3. Statistics
Difference
*Difference
-3,1
- Test yes: N= 100, Mean/ xbar= 3,98, s= 1,1757
95% CI for the Difference
4. Is the entire interval above or below zero?
95% CI (-3,4479; -2,7521)
*Difference = no - yes
3. Difference between the Means in the sample (- 3,1) and the
Comments
corresponding Confidence-Interval (CI= -3,45; -2,75) for the
-3 -2 -1 0 significance.
population
is between -3,4479 and -2,7521.
Distribution of Data • Distribution of Data: Compare the location and means of samples. Look
5. Compare the data and means of the samples. for unusual data before interpreting the results of the test. 4. The Interval Diagram plots the Difference between the Means as well
no
yes
1 2 3 4 5 6 Data are not normally distributed; interpretation of Results under reserve
The t-Test shows, that there is a significant difference of 3,1 grades on the Rating-Scale of Taste.
If the Chef checks the chocolate, then there is significantly less chocolate in the Chocolate-Cookies!
Focus is now on the Root Causes (x) of eating the already weighed chocolate for Chocolate‐Cookies (Y)
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Root Cause Analysis > Analysis Strategy Technische Universität München
The Analysis Strategy combines: focusing by differentiation and analysing of causal relations
Analysis Strategy
Problem Cookie Taste bad
(Selection e.g. via
Y
Pareto‐Diagram)
(Test: Correlation/ Regression)
Difference Hypothesis causal chain
Relationship Hypothesis
Problem‐Focus Choc‐Cookie Van‐Cookie
2. Taste bad Y1 =/ ≠ Y2 …
Taste bad top‐down
(Differentiation) (Test: Chi2, t‐Test/ ANOVA)
Y1 Y2 5 x WHY …? BECAUSE …!
Y= f(x) 1. = 1,52 grades
R2= 96,5% 1. Why? n. If …,
1. Cause‐Level Because! then …!
(Causation by Trigger) weight of chocolate
too low (x)
The logical links between
Choc‐Cookies (Chef did Choc‐Cookies (Chef ate the causes determine the
Problem‐Focus entry points for Solutions:
(Differentiation)
NOT eat weighed 3. = 3,1 grades weighed Chocolate)
‐ or: select both
Chocolate) (Y1.1) (Y1.2)
‐ and: select (at least) one
2. Why? 3. If …,
or and Because! then …!
2. Cause‐Level Chef likes to snack on
Chef needs to assure
Chef thinks the time is
(Causation) Quality of chocolate
chocolate (x1.2.1) right for a test (x1.2.3)
(x1.2.2)
3. Why? 2. If …,
Chef has too few Because! then …!
3. Cause‐Level Quality of chocolate is
snack on chocolate is a opportunities to test
(Causation)
a determinant of Cust.
basic need (x1.2.1.1) (eat) chocolate
Satisfaction (x1.2.2.1)
(x1.2.3.1)
Develop Solution to n. Why? 1. If …,

unchangeable facts unchangeable facts
n. Cause‐Level Manager forbids Chef ‐ circumvent Because! then …!
of reality of reality causal chain
(Causation by Root Cause) too eat too much ‐ adjust or
‐ eliminate (Root) Cause bottom‐up
chocolate (x1.2.3.1.1)
5 x IF … THEN …!
It also combines quantitative statistical and qualitative logical reasoning

IMPROVE: From the development of Solution‐Ideas for the (Root‐)Causes (x)
to the decision to implement suitable measures
Develop Solution-Ideas to circumvent, adjust or eliminate (Root)-Causes Solution-Ideas
- Focus on the selected Root-Causes in the Fault-Tree

- Develop Solution-Ideas to circumvent, adjust or eliminate these Root-Causes Solution-Ideas
Determination of
Quality-
Determination
Kano- Costs of the
Rank
Category Problem/
Problem
Sum of
Year:
Problem Root-Cause Solution-Idea
Chef thinks the time is right for a check (x1.2.3) 25% Inform the Chef about the consequences of his late check (when ingredients are weighed)
100,00 €
Chef has too few opportunities to check (eat) chocolate (x1.2.3.1) 50% Let the Chef check the Cocolate only before ingredients are weighed
25% Procurement of only high qualiy chocolate
Y_01: Output: Cookies (baken) |

1 Must-Be Problem: COOKIES (BAKEN) 100%
TASTE INSIPID
Evaluate the solution ideas and select suitable solutions Solution-Selection
- Evaluate Solution-Ideas according to their pros and cons (Force-Field-Analysis)

- Evaluate Solution-Ideas according to their effort/ costs and benefits/ wins (Solution-Selection-Matrix)
Specify Measures and minimize their Risks Action-List and FMEA
- Specify Measures for the selected Solution-Ideas – Who? What? By when? FMEA
(Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
Risk-Analysis Improvement new Risk-Analysis
Probability of
Probability of
the Problem
the Problem
Detection of
Detection of
Severity of
Severity of
R R
the Effect
the Effect
Cause
Cause
- Identify and minimize Risks related to the Measures (FMEA)
actual controls to detect the Failures/
potential Failures/ Problems
Pr oblems
potential Effects of the Failures/ Problems potential Causes of the Failure/ Pr oblem P Countermeasures P
N N
Measure-No.
Measure (What has to be done?)
10= catastrophic
10= catastrophic
Risk-Priority-
Risk-Priority-
1= always -
1= always -
10= always
10= always
1= never -
1= never -
10= never
10= never
Number
Number
1= no -
1= no -
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
Which Failures/ Problems can result from the By which existing Controls could the Failure/ How could the trigger of the Failure/ Problem, i.e.
Measures? Problem be detected, before it occurs? What is the Effect of the Failure/ Problem? Which Influence triggers the Failure/ Problem? their Root-Causes be eliminated
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
Let t he Chef weigh 10 g of chocolate for her immediate brushing of teet h after check of
1. can cause caries periodic dental prophylaxis 5 tooth loss 7 sugar/ bacterial plaque 10 350 7 2 5 70
special Chocolate Check chocolate
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
...? ...? ...? ...? ...? ... ?
Decide on Measures and implement them Decide and Implement
- Present Measures to the Sponsor and Accountables and let them decide about their implementation
- Implement Measures
Summary IMPROVE: Suitable Measures ready for implementation

Outlook Control: check the extend of improvement, develop a Process-Management-Plan, handover and close the Project
Technische
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Develop Solution-Ideas to circumvent, adjust or eliminate (Root)-Causes > Solution-Ideas Universität München
Develop Solution‐Ideas to eliminate, adjust or circumvent the Root‐Causes and …
Solution-Ideas
After the identification of the Root-Causes the Solutions can now be developed.
Depending on the Type of Cause the Solution can serve to:
- eliminate,
- adjust or
- circumvent a Root-Cause.
At first focus on the Problems with the highest Priority.

1. Calculate the Quality-Costs, which are caused by the Problem or at least estimate them.
2. Enter the identified Root-Causes.
3. Evaluate how strong the Problem is determined by each Root-Cause.
4. The Sum of Determination indicates the portion, how strong all Root-Causes together determine the Problem.
5. Develop a Solution-Ideas which could manage the Root-Cause.
6. Evaluate the Benefit of the Solution, i.e. the contribution of the Solution to eliminate, adjust or circumvent the Root-Cause.
7. Evaluate the Effort for the Solution, i.e. the necessary consumption of Resources (time/ costs) to implement the Solution.
8. The Effect shows the product: Quality-Cost x Determination of the Problem, i.e.:
If the Cause could be controlled by this Solution, then the Quality-Costs of the Problem would be reduced by this amount.
9. The Rank of a Solution results from the relation: Effort/ Benefit, i.e.:
The higher the Effort of a Solution is in relation to the Benefit of the Solution, the lower is its rank.
Solution-Ideas
Determination of
Sum of
Determination
Problem
Quality-Costs
Reduction of
Rank (Effort/
Benefit)
Kano-
Benefit
Effort
Rank Categor Quality-Costs of the Problem/ Year:
y
Problem Root-Cause Solution-Idea

Chef thinks the time is right for a test (x1.2.3) Inform the Chef about the consequences of his late check (when
25% ingredients are weighed)
6 6 3 25 €
100,00 €
Chef has too few opportunities to test (eat) Let the Chef check the Cocolate only before ingredients are
chocolate (x1.2.3.1) 50% weighed
8 2 1 50 €
Manager forbids Chef to test (eat) too much
chocolate (x1.2.3.1.1) 25% Procurement of only high quality chocolate 9 7 2 25 €
Y_01: Output: Cookies
(baken) | Problem: ...? ...? ./. €
1 Must-Be 100%
COOKIES (BAKEN) ...? ...? ./. €
TASTE INSIPID
...? ...? ./. €
...? ...? ./. €
...? ...? ./. €
...? ...? ./. €
...? ...? ./. €
… evaluate their Benefit and their Effort.

Technische
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Develop Solution-Ideas to circumvent, adjust or eliminate (Root)-Causes > Solution-Selection Universität München
Chart Solution‐Selection
The Chart Solution Selection shows all

Solutions in a Effort x Benefit Diagram.
The size of bubbles correspond to the Effect

of the Solutions, i.e.: reduced Quality-Costs.
Overview to all Solutions
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Specify Measures and minimize their Risks > Action-Plan Technische Universität München
Specify Measures to implement the Solution‐Ideas
Action-Plan
In the Action-Plan the Solution-Ideas are specified.
1. Specify in the Measures exactly what has to be done to implement the Solution-Ideas.
2. Specify the result, which will be achieved by the implementation.
3. Perform an FMEA (see FMEA).
4. Estimate the costs of implementation.
5. Define a deadline for the implementation.
6. Define a responsible person for every measure.
7. Monitor the progress of implementation.
Action-Plan
Quality-Costs
Reduction of
Measure-No.
Rank (Effort/
Benefit)
Solution-Idea Measure (What has to be done?) Result (What will be achieved?)
3 25 € Inform the Chef about the consequences of his late check (when ingredients are weighed)
1 50 € Let the Chef check the Cocolate only before ingredients are weighed 1. Let the Chef weigh 10 g of chocolate for her special Chocolate test Chef avoids to tests the weighed ingredients
2 25 € Procurement of only high quality chocolate
Make sure that an Risk‐Analysis (FMEA) for the Measures is performed in between

Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Specify Measures and minimize their Risks > FMEA Technische Universität München
Specify the potential Failures/ Problems, their Causes and Effects of the developed Measures
FMEA
Risk-Analysis
(Failure Mode and Effects Analysis)
Severity of the
Frequency of
the Problem
Detection of
R
Cause
Effect
actual controls to detect the potential Effects of the Failures/ potential Causes of the Failure/
potential Failures/ Problems
Failures/ Problems Problems Problem P
N
Measure-No.
Measure (What has to be done?)
10= disastrous
1= each time -
Risk-Priority-
1= minimal -
10= always
1= never -
10= never
Number
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
By which existing Controls can the
Which Failures/ Problems can result Failure/ Problem be detected, before Which Effect results from the Which Influence triggers the Failure/
from the Measures? it occurs? Failure/ Problem? Problem?
...? ...? ...?
Let the Chef weigh 10 g of chocolate

1. can cause caries periodic dental prophylaxis 5 tooth loss 7 sugar/ bacterial plaque 10 350
for her special Chocolate test
...? ...? ...?
Detection of the
Severity of the
Frequency of
R
Problem
Cause
Effect
Countermeasures P
N
FMEA means Failure Mode and Effects Analysis.
Risk-Priority-Number
10= disastrous
1= each time -
1= minimal -
10= always
1= never -
10= never
Rating:
Rating:
Rating:
It is a procedure to evaluate Risks of Products and Processes.
How could the trigger of the Failure/ Problem, i.e. their
Root-Causes be eliminated?
The FMEA here has been adapted to evaluate the Risks of the developed Measures. ...? ...? ...?
immediate brushing of teeth after each test of chocolate 7 2 5 70
...? ...? ...?
Calculate the related Risk and reduce high Risks (RPN> 100) by countermeasures

Control: From the identification of Problems (Y) to the Project charter
Calculate Process Capability and monitor Process Performance over time Process Capability Control Chart
- Calculate Process Capability, e.g. Pp/ Ppk, Sigma Level (see the recommendations in the Data Collection Plan)
Process Capability Report for Yt1_Cookie-Weight I-MR Chart of Y_Consumption_per_Day
Summary Report
Is the process mean stable? Comments
Evaluate the % of out-of-control points.
LSL Target USL The process mean may not be stable. 5 (15,6%) data points are out of control
0% > 5% on the I chart. Keep in mind that you may see 0,7% out-of-control points by
Process Data Overall chance, even when the process is stable.
LSL 18 Within
Target 20 Yes No
USL 22 Overall Capability 15,6%
Sample Mean 20,9507 Z.Bench 0,18
Sample N 60 Z.LSL 1,26
StDev(Overall) 2,33315 Z.USL 0,45
- Display Process Performance over time, e.g. I/ MR Chart (see the recommendations in the Data Collection Plan)
StDev(Within) 2,04775 Ppk 0,15
Cpm 0,26
Potential (Within) Capability Individual and Moving Range Charts
Investigate any out-of-control points.
Z.Bench 0,31
25
Z.LSL 1,44 U CL=23,92
Z.USL 0,51
Individual Value
Cpk 0,17
10 _
X=5,89
-5
LCL= -12,13
U CL=22,14
20
Moving Range
10
15,0 16,5 18,0 19,5 21,0 22,5 24,0 25,5 __
MR=6,78
Performance
Observed Expected Overall Expected Within 0 LCL= 0
PPM < LSL 100000,00 102992,26 74799,56 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
PPM > USL 266666,67 326450,62 304179,60
PPM Total 366666,67 429442,89 378979,15 N: 32 Mean: 5,8947 StDev(within): 6,0087 StDev(overall): 4,0946
Control limits are estimated using the StDev(within).
Verify the improvement statistically Test the Difference
- Test the effect of the Measures by Difference-Hypothesis for the important Output-Variables
Boxplot of Y_Cookie_Weight
27,5
25,0
- Calculate the Benefit on the Basis of the Difference
Y_Cookie_Weight
22,5
20,0
17,5
15,0
t_1 t_2
time_of_measurement
Ensure sustainability of the improved performance Process-Management & Standards
- Develop a Process-Management-Plan, with a Monitoring- and Out-of-Control-Plan

- Develop, publish and implement new Standards for the Process – especially for Activities and Methods
- Establish a continuous Improvement-Process
Finish the Project Story-Book & Belt
- Finish and present your Six Sigma Story

- Handover the Project and celebrate
Summary Control: Verify the improvement and ensure its sustainability

Outlook: next Project?
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Monitoring of Process Performance > Process-Capability Technische Universität München
Process‐Capability: The before vs. after comparison of the shows a significant improvement.
Before/After Capability Comparison for Y_Choc-Cookie_pre vs Y_Choc-Cookie_post

2. Summary Report The Process Capability Analysis shows:
Reduction in % Out of Spec Customer Requirements
1.
100% % Out of spec was reduced by 100% from 2,66%
to 0,00%.
Lower Spec
*
Target
1,5
Upper Spec
4
1. The Customer Requirements are defined as Specification Limits on
the rating scale of taste:
0
Was the process standard deviation reduced?
0,05 0,1 > 0,5
4. Process Characterization
- Upper specification limit (USL): 4 (see Data Collection Plan)
Statistics Before After Change
Yes No
Mean
StDev(overall)
2,46
0,79671
1,65
0,47937
-0,81
-0,31734
(Taste should not be rated worse than 4:= adequate)
P < 0,001
Actual (overall) capability - Target: 1,5 (see Data Collection Plan
Pp * * *
3. Did the process mean change? Ppk 0,64 1,63 0,99 (The Mean of Rating of taste should be 1,5:= very good/ good)
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5 Z.Bench 1,93 4,90 2,97
% Out of spec 2,66 0,00 -2,66
PPM (DPMO) 26621 0 -26621
Yes
P < 0,001
No
2. The improvement in the Variation of the Process Performance from:
s= 0,796 to 0,479 is significant (p< 0,001).
5. Actual (Overall) Capability
Are the data below the limit and close to the target?
Comments
Target USL
Before: Y_Choc-Cookie_pre
After: Y_Choc-Cookie_post
3. The improvement in the Change of Mean from:
Before
• The process standard deviation was reduced significantly (p < 0,05). xbar= 2,46 to 1,65 is also significant (p< 0,001).
• The process mean changed significantly. It is now closer to the target (p <
0,05).
Actual (overall) capability is what the customer experiences. 4. Different Parameter of Process Capability:
After
Potential (within) capability is what could be achieved if process shifts and
drifts were eliminated. - Pp (Process performance) and Ppk (Pp „katayori“ (:= centre))
- Z.Bench
- % out of specification
- PPM / DPMO
These parameter focus on different aspects of Process Capability
We achieved a significant increase in the Rating of Taste of the 5. Histograms for the Before vs. After conditions.
Chocolate-Cookies from grade: 2,46 to 1,65 (Target = 1,5) The Anderson-Darling normality test shows a significant result.
This means: interpretation of Results under reserve
Related to the Customer Requirements we have improved the taste
of the Chocolate-Cookies for about 3 Sigma-Levels,
from 1,93 to 4,9 sigma.
The Performance of the Process now is closer to the target (1,5).

(see the t-Test for Difference from target below)
Focus is now on the time‐dependent course of the Process
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Monitoring of Process Performance > Control-Chart Technische Universität München
During the first week after implementation of improvement measures, there were a lot of …
I-MR Chart of Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste_post first Week Tests in the I/ MR Control-Chart showed following signals for systematic events:
12
Test Results for I Chart of Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste_post_first Week
UCL=10,27
8
TEST 1. One point more than 3,00 standard deviations from center line.
Individual Value
2 2 2 4
2
2
2
2 _ Test Failed at points: 1
4 X=3,92
3
3
3
3
3
TEST 2. 7 points in a row on same side of center line.
3 4
0 Test Failed at points: 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14
LCL=-2,43
1
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
TEST 3. 5 points in a row all increasing or all decreasing.
Observation Test Failed at points: 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20
1
TEST 4. 12 points in a row alternating up and down.
8 UCL=7,80 Test Failed at points: 31; 32
Moving Range
6
2 2 2 2 2 2 Test Results for MR Chart of Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste_post_first Week
4
__ TEST 1. One point more than 3,00 standard deviations from center line.
MR=2,39
2 Test Failed at points: 2
0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 LCL=0
2 2 TEST 2. 7 points in a row on same side of center line.
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31
Test Failed at points: 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 27; 28; 29; 30; 31; 32
Observation
Patterns in the course of the Process are signals that indicate (probably) systematic events in the Process.
Every systematic event should be analysed for its Root-Causes and eliminated with appropriate Solutions!
… signals in the process, indicating, that in the first week the Process was not yet under control.
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Verify the improvement statistically > Test of Hypothesis Technische Universität München
Hypothesis: There is a difference in Taste before vs. after process‐improvement
2-Sample t Test for the Mean of Y_Choc-Cookie-Taste_pre (1) and Choc-Cookie-Taste_post (2) The tests of the Hypothesis with the t-Tests shows:
Summary Report

2. Individual Samples 1. significant difference in the rated Taste between Chocolate-Cookies
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5 Statistics Y_Choc-Coo_1 Y_Choc-Coo_2
Sample size 100 100 pre (before) vs. post (after) process-improvement (p < 0,001)
Yes No Mean 2,46 1,65
P < 0,001 95% CI (2,302; 2,618) (1,5549; 1,7451)
The mean of Y_Choc-Coo_1 is significantly different from the mean of
Y_Choc-Coo_2 (p < 0,05).
2. Parameter for the conditions of Taste:
Difference Between Samples - pre (before): N= 100, Mean/ xbar= 2,46, s= 0,796
3. Statistics *Difference
- post (after): N= 100, Mean/ xbar= 1,65, s= 0,479
Difference 0,81
4. 95% CI for the Difference
Is the entire interval above or below zero?
95% CI (0,62639; 0,99361)
*Difference = Y_Choc-Coo_1 - Y_Choc-Coo_2

3. Difference between the Means in the sample (0,81) and the
Comments
corresponding Confidence-Interval (CI= 0,626; 0,993) for the
0,00 0,25 0,50 0,75 1,00 significance.
population **
is between 0,62639 and 0,99361.
Compare the data and means of the samples.
• Distribution of Data: Compare the location and means of samples. Look
for unusual data before interpreting the results of the test. 4. The Interval Diagram plots the Difference between the Means as well
Y_Choc-Coo_1
Y_Choc-Coo_2
1 2 3 4 Data are not normally distributed; interpretation of Results under reserve
The t-Test shows, that there is a significant improvement of 0,81 grades on the Rating-Scale of Taste.
Our Customer will like the Chocolate-Cookies better now. But there is still room for improvement!
Focus is now on the target achievement of the Chocolate‐Cookie
Methods & Tools > DMAIC > Verify the improvement statistically > Test of Hypothesis Technische Universität München
Hypothesis: There is a difference in Taste between the Rating and the target
1-Sample t Test for the Mean of Y_Choc-Cookie_post The tests of the Hypothesis with the 1-Sample t-Tests shows:
Summary Report
1. significant difference between the rated Taste of Chocolate-Cookies

1. Is the mean greater than 1,5?
2. vs. the Target (p < 0,001)
Statistics
0 0,05 0,1 > 0,5
Sample size 100
Yes No
Mean
90% CI
1,65
(1,5704; 1,7296) 2. Statistics for the comparison of Taste:
Standard deviation 0,47937
P = 0,001
The mean of Y_Choc-Cooki is significantly greater than the target (p <
Target 1,5 - N= 100, Mean
0,05). - xbar= 1,65, Confidence Interval (1,57; 1,73)
- s= 0,479
- Target= 1,5
Where are the data relative to the target?
1,5 Comments 3. Histogram with Target (1,5) and Confidence Interval of Mean.
• Test: You can conclude that the mean is greater than 1,5 at the 0,05
level of significance.
• CI: Quantifies the uncertainty associated with estimating the mean
from sample data. You can be 90% confident that the true mean is There is a significant Difference between Rating of Taste and the target
between 1,5704 and 1,7296, and 95% confident that it is greater than
1,5704.
• Distribution of Data: Compare the location of the data to the target.
for Taste, i.e. the target is not yet reached, indicated by the target Value
Look for unusual data before interpreting the test results.
falling outside the Confidence Interval of the Mean.
1 2
The 1-Sample t-Test shows, that we nearly reached the target of Taste with the Process improvement.
This means, that there is still potential for improvement.
But we can be sure, that our Customer will like the improved Chocolate-Cookies already better now.
Focus is now on the sustainability of the improved performance
End of this Course

process improvement methods and tools
Many thanks to Holly and Martin from TUM who invited me to participate in this course.
It is a big honour for me and was a great experience.
Thanks to Laura who coproduced and her Chef Wanda who participated in the video.
Thanks to Lili and Charlotte for beeing a generous Customer.
Nora – you are the sunhine of my life – every day.

Six Sigma PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Six Sigma PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Six Sigma PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technische Universität München

Dr. Reiner Hutwelker Quality Engineering & Management – Module 9 1

Dr. Reiner Hutwelker Quality Engineering & Management – Module 9 2

Six Sigma is a concept with several meanings –– itit links Practice with

… to analyse potentials and to verify improvements

Input Check Process Output Check

+/- Influences of + acting (e.g. transform/ transport Input) +

What is the Cause? What is the Problem?

What is the Solution? What is the Effect?

LSL LSL USL USL xbar/

Process Capability: 6 Sigma

68% xbar = 0

-2s -1s Mean +1s +2s

Theory Project Statistics

Input Process Output

How to reach sustainability? What is the Problem?

Prove the improvements Identify an improvement potential

What is the Solution? Improve Measure What are the Influences?

Develop Solutions Map the As-Is-Process

What are the Causes of the Problem?

Evaluate data graphically

Start a new Six Sigma Project (Project-Topic – Project Definition)

Delimitate and structure the field of the Project (SIPOC) Supplier-Input-Process-Output-Customer

Setup the contract for the Project (Project-Charter) Project-Charter

sigmaGuide is a software guide for Six Sigma Projects.

Part 1 Identify a Six Sigma Project

Part 2 Specify a Six Sigma Project

Part 3 Implement a Six Sigma Project

Dr. Reiner Hutwelker Quality Engineering & Management – Module 9 12

Phase Tool Purpose

Open the table: Project-Topic

This will take about 5 minutes.

Project‐Topic: Describe your observations with your own words and answer the questions

Which weakness did you notice?

1/ 7 Please describe your observation in one sentence.

2/ 7 What is the key point of the weakness?

Risk of the Topic: 69,18%

Dr. Reiner Hutwelker Quality Engineering & Management – Module 9 15

To further specify the topic as a Six Sigma Project, …

Define Part 2 Specify a Six Sigma Project

Problem Describe the Problem

Effect Describe the Effect of the Problem

Solution Outline Solution-Ideas - if already available

Project-Definition Summary: Process, Output, Problem and Effect

Section 1: Process and Output

Risk of the Topic: 69,18%

Section 1: Process and Output

Summary: Summary: Voice of Customer

Solution Idea to 1. Problem

Deliver later (?)

Solution Idea to 3. Problem

Summary: Voice of Business

The Quality costs by reworking are estimated to 111€ / year.

To further specify the topic as a Six Sigma Project, …

Define Part 3 Implement a Six Sigma Project

Chart: Y CtQ´s Outputs, Problems and their Severity

Project-Charter Complete and sign the Project-Charter

In the Voice-to-Criticals we will:

In the Project-Charter we will: