November 17, 2010

short term targets

We did an interesting project improvement by using 6 sigma. Though it was only a simple case study and things cannot be simpler in real life, I still got much experience about the implantation of 6 sigma. However, in my opinion, there is a significant difference between our plane-making project and real manufacture. What we had to do was trying to improvement our project within 4 hours. In this case, it was definitely a short-term target. As time was limited, it is impossible for us to change our project a lot. If we kept practicing without any discussion, it is possible that we can do better than what we did yesterday. I think it may not happen in real practice as practice without discussion can only make a little improvement. And of course, I don't think a company will just give people 4 hours' long to improve such a project. If it became a long-term target, for example, we have 3 days' time or more than that, than keep practicing couldn't be the best way to improve. We need to do what we had done yesterday and make those theories into practice.

In an organization, the same situation could happen. There are short-term target and long-term target that require clearly defining because we can see that in our experiment, some discussion that we did was definitely useless to improve that short-term targe

- 2 comments by 1 or more people Not publicly viewable

  1. Lucy, I agree with you. The time was really short and normally there was so much more to consider. We just focused on what we needed to become fast in this one hour of challenge. In real life the wrong way. Anyway I think it was still valuable. I mean you just cannot go for a 3 day case study. So it was just to give us a first insight into the process, somehow a scratching on the surface. But we understood the procedure and have seen how tricky improvement actually can be. But yes in real life you would approach it a bit different, but still a very good exercise with a lot of benfits…

    18 Nov 2010, 22:52

  2. Thanks for your comment, Jan. Of course what we did was quite valuable. There is no doubt that we should do what we did in the classes such as discussing the problems and solutions, dividing our group into two teams to analyze our project better, etc. If we just practiced without thinking, we could do better than we did, but it is definitely wrong and we cannot learn anything through it. Our purpose of the project is improving the process, but the subject of our class is to learn how to use 6 sigma properly. So in this case we could say the results is not important. Even if we made our process worse, it doesn¡¯t matter as what we learned in the project is the most important.

    19 Nov 2010, 00:37

Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

November 2010

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Oct |  Today  | Dec
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30               

Search this blog



Most recent comments

  • every tools has its specifics..however…they are not away from limitations…i believe two or more … by on this entry
  • yes, I agree wiki supports knowledge sharing, but not all the time. In KBAM, it did. Because we had … by on this entry
  • I agree with you, Vagelis. So that's why I said it's important to judge which one is more effective.… by on this entry
  • Hiii Lucy, yeah I feel the same as wel! in LE and RDM my team was rarely use wiki since we had meeti… by on this entry
  • You may wish to consider that in real life as a manager of an organization meetings like the one we … by on this entry

Blog archive

Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder