Guest Post: SPC…It has One Great Point

Today’s follow-up post is written by Christian Paulsen, Senior Lean Six Sigma Consultant with over 20 years of manufacturing leadership experience.

I recently asked the question, SPC…What’s the point? in a post that was more about leadership than SPC. That blog stressed that Lean Leaders don’t implement systems like Statistical Process Control unless their team has the knowledge and tools required to use them properly. So what is the point?

With the right knowledge and tools, SPC has two very good points. There are many more benefits but we’ll limit this discussion to two. All data has background noise. Only some data contain true signals. The normal variation that occurs in all processes can make it difficult to recognize the difference between background noise or normal variation and a real signal to act. The point is that the proper use of Statistical Process Control will help you sort through the noise and to recognize true signals.

SPC helps you sort through the noise by enabling you to understand process variation. This understanding helps you to avoid two common mistakes:

1. Failing to recognize that it’s time to act. This happens when you miss a signal. You may be tempted to explain away the reasons why the data is trending the wrong way but this could cost you months of reaction time if you missed a statistical signal. 
2. Reacting to normal variation as if it is a signal. In other words, this is taking action when there is not statistical reason to react (interpreting background noise as a signal). This is probably the more common issue in today’s world and it can make things worse by causing more variability in the process. 

Nothing, not even SPC can completely eliminate making these mistakes. Using Control Charts however will strike a balance between these errors and will minimize the times you fail to respond or react in error. Control Charts will also predict future performance.

This leads to a couple corollaries:

1. You cannot improve a process that is not under control. In this case, you must take action to get your process under control before taking steps to improve the process. 
2. You cannot expect a process that is in statistical control to get better results unless you change the process. Trying harder and superficial efforts to improve will not make significant change and your results will only swing within the range of normal variation. 

Too many managers treat any data point going in the wrong direction as a trend that must be corrected. Others treat any data point going in the right direction as confirmation that they are a great manager. Either way, they don’t recognize normal variation.

Can you share an example of where Statistical Process Control helped you avoid these common mistakes?

Dr. Donald Wheeler’s book Understanding Variation: The Key to Managing Chaos inspired this post and is a great source on this topic. The common errors discussed here are from Dr. Wheeler’s book.

About the Author: Christian Paulsen is a Senior Lean Six Sigma Consultant who helps companies optimize performance.and adds value to organizations by driving continuous process improvements and bottom line cost savings. Christian brings over 20 years of manufacturing leadership experience and Lean Manufacturing expertise in the food and beverage industry. He authors Lean Leadership and is a regular contributor to the Consumer Goods blog.

Quality and Social Responsibility

In the last few years and because of the changes in the environment and world economy, the term Social Responsibility (SR) has become an increasingly discussed topic among consumers and organizations:
– consumers have become more alert of which products/services should buy, depending on how those products/services have been produced,
– organizations, in order to pursue a long-term profitability, credibility, and sustainability they have started looking different ways to become and act more social responsible.

In his last post, ASQ CEO Paul Borawski talked about SR and Quality, and asked the following question: “Have those that know quality raised their voices to explain to organizations that being socially responsible is not about philanthropy (giving money for social good), but about business : “Doing well by doing good.” 

It is known that SR is still a misinterpreted term. Lot of people/organizations think that it only refers to protect the environment (go green!), while others only to give money for social goods. To solve these issues, ISO (International Organization for Standardization) published in 2010 a new standard – ISO 26000: Guidance on Social Responsibility – to help organizations, regardless of their activity, size or location, to understand what SR really means, and to guide on how they can translate its principles into effective practices, acting in an ethical and transparent way that contributes to the health and welfare of society.

QUALITY and SR

Quality and SR are linked terms. Quality concepts, tools and techniques will help any organization to implement that translation I pointed before. By developing an effective SR program, getting feedback, and keeping improving it, organizations not only will sustain their SR goals but also they will make more profits and stay in business. 

In a recent study that ASQ conducted in partnership with IBM where they gathered which are the distinguishing characteristics and metrics that worldwide organizations use to lead to successful SR programs, they expressed that “Quality and SR are complementary strategies for improving the current and future outcomes of organizations and people. The first provides a conceptual approach and supporting tools for analyzing the nature of and behavior of the world. The latter outlines a universal structure for creating a sustainable future.” Agree!
John Elkington – winner the ASQ Hutchens Medal for social responsibility in 2010 – said: “Looking back at the quality revolution, I see strong parallels with where we find ourselves today. Early on, a few businesses decided to view quality as an opportunity rather than a cost, and their investment in TQM paid off handsomely. To make this happen, leaders had to think completely out of the box. Later, TQM leaders took another step, expanding quality management beyond products into behaviors, a key next step both in terms of social responsibility and the wider sustainability agenda.” Agree!

BEHAVIORS – SR starts with us

One important thing to highlight is that we always talk about SR focused on organizations; that type of SR is known as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). However, we forgot that any organization is completely managed and sustained by PEOPLE. Therefore, in order to have an organization committed to SR, the people working for it, and every single person in a society, have to be involve in SR. This last type of SR is called Individual Social Responsibility (ISR). 

The Workshop for Civic Initiatives Foundation (WCIF), Bulgaria, describes ISR in its position statement on SR as: “The ISR includes the engagement of each person towards the community where he lives, which can be expressed as an interest towards what’s happening in the community, as well as in the active participation in the solving of some of the local problems. Under community we understand the village, the small town or the residential complex in the big city, where lives every one of us. Each community lives its own life that undergoes a process of development all the time. And everyone of us could take part in that development in different ways, for example by taking part in cleaning of the street on which he lives, by taking part in organization of an event, connected with the history of the town or the village or by rendering social services to children without parents or elderly people. The individual social responsibility also could be expressed in making donations for significant for the society causes – social, cultural or ecological.”

ISR is at the roots of CSR, because a corporate comprises of individuals and hence determines the social responsibility culture it follows. If ISR becomes way of life, CSR may be an automatic end result.

EXAMPLES
* FIFA – International Federation of Association Football 

If you have watched lately a soccer game, you should saw before the kickoff, children appear with a flag that says: Fair Play. As part of its battle against child labor around the world as well as its efforts to improve working conditions, FIFA has increased the requirements to be met by licensees in the FIFA Quality Concept for Footballs. 

If you want to read more about how FIFA is committed to SR, click here.

* ARGENTINA – Mining Social Responsibility Protocol
Argentina, the third largest gold producer in South America, is working this year -2012- to create the world’s first national protocol on sustainable and socially responsible mining, in order to govern “the conduct and actions that mining companies should follow when prospecting or exploring mining opportunities” in Argentina.
If you are interested in read more about it, click here.

CONCLUSION
As every single thing we do in our life, company or community, we chose to do it; and so we do with SR (individual or corporate). SR is voluntary, it is an election we decide to make it or not. Everything is in our hands.

And because of this topic, the “Quote of the Month” I’ve selected is: “Be the change you want to see in the world” ~Mahatma Gandhi

Are you or your company committed to SR? 

Image provided by: Apple’s Eyes Studio – FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Guest Post: SPC….What’s the Point?

It is a pleasure for me to present today the first Guest Blog Post by Christian Paulsen. He is a Senior Lean Six Sigma Consultant who helps companies optimize performance and adds value to organizations by driving continuous process improvements and bottom line cost savings. Christian brings over 20 years of manufacturing leadership experience and Lean Manufacturing expertise in the food and beverage industry. He authors Lean Leadership and is a regular contributor to the Consumer Goods blog.

I am walking the production floor (going to the Gemba) to check out a few things for myself with a new client. Going to the Gemba is a great tool for any leader because you will learn things about your operation that you can’t learn from your office or the conference room. 

The purpose of today’s Gemba walk is to look for waste on one of the packaging lines. It becomes apparent that there is quite a bit of waste at the filler itself because the weight control is not good. Lousy weight control in food plants results in giving away more product than you should (the difference between the actual weight of a product and the declared weight on the label is give-away). I look at the jar-to-jar variation then naturally turn to the Statistical Process Control (SPC) charts. It’s quite clear that the average weight of the jars is well above the declared weight. The filler needs to be adjusted to reduce the weights. The Filler Operator approaches and tells me that she knows that she should turn the filler down but machine is not capable of running any lower weights. 

To get a better understanding of how a filler machine works, here is a video showing a Pacific Filler that is filling jars with mayonnaise. Pacific Fillers and similar equipment are fairly common in the food and beverage industry.

This reminds me of another Gemba walk with another client. The SPC charts clearly show that the weights on this filler need to be adjusted too. I ask the operator if she is familiar with the SPC rules. She does not know what I am talking about even though they are printed on the control chart that she is filling out every 15 minutes. She let’s me know that she has been here for almost a year and “knows when to make adjustments.”

These real events illustrate two issues that are all too common in today’s manufacturing plants and other work sites.

• Team members don’t have the tools they need to perform their job well: The first operator knows that every jar she produces has waste because it is needlessly over-weight. Yet she is unable to do anything about it. What is the point of using SPC if you cannot do anything with the information? 
• Team members don’t have the knowledge to do their job well: The second operator thinks that her experience is enough to know when to make adjustments. Yet we know that strictly following the SPC rules is the best way to keep a process in statistical control and to optimize the weights at your filler. What is the point of using SPC if you don’t know what to do with the information? 

The bottom line is that Lean Leaders don’t implement systems like Statistical Process Control unless their team has the knowledge and tools required to use them properly. SPC is a great tool that is under-utilized. Many food plants use it for weight control but it could be used to help control many key metrics. 

Can you share an example of how SPC is used at your site?

Read the follow-up post of this post/Part 2 here.

I recommend you to check out Christian Paulsen blog, you’ll find more than interesting posts. Thanks Chris!