Process Improvement

and
Process Capability

© Christian Terwiesch 2003

The Concept of Yields

Flow rate of units processed correctly at the resource

Yield of Resource=
Flow rate

Flow rate of units processed correctly

Yield of Process=
Flow rate

90% 80% 90% 100% 90%

Line Yield: 0.9 x 0.8 x 0.9 x 1 x 0.9

Rework / Elimination of Flow Units

Step 1 Test 1 Step 2 Test 2 Step 3 Test 3

Rework:
Defects can be corrected
Same or other resource
Rework
Leads to variability
Examples:
- Readmission to ICU
Step 1 Test 1 Step 2 Test 2 Step 3 Test 3 - Toyota case

Loss of Flow units:

Defects can NOT be corrected
Leads to variability
Step 1 Test 1 Step 2 Test 2 Step 3 Test 3
To get X units, we have to
start X/y units
Examples:
- Interviewing
- Semiconductor fab
The Concept of Consistency:
Who is the Better Target Shooter?

Not just the mean is important, but also the variance

Need to look at the distribution function

The Impact of Variation on Quality: The Xootr Case

Variation is (again) the root cause of all evil

Two Types of Causes for Variation

Common Cause Variation (low level)

Common Cause Variation (high level)

Assignable Cause Variation

• Need to measure and reduce common cause variation

• Identify assignable cause variation as soon as possible
 Statistical Process Control: Control Charts

Process • Track process parameter over time

Parameter - mean
- percentage defects
Upper Control Limit (UCL)

• Distinguish between
- common cause variation
Center Line
(within control limits)
- assignable cause variation
Lower Control Limit (LCL)
(outside control limits)

• Measure process performance:

how much common cause variation
Time
is in the process while the process
is “in control”?
Parameters for Creating X-bar Charts

Number of Factor for X- Factor for Factor for Factor to

Observations bar Chart Lower Upper estimate
in Subgroup (A2) control Limit control limit Standard
(n) in R chart in R chart deviation, (d2)
(D3) (D4)
2 1.88 0 3.27 1.128
3 1.02 0 2.57 1.693
4 0.73 0 2.28 2.059
5 0.58 0 2.11 2.326
6 0.48 0 2.00 2.534
7 0.42 0.08 1.92 2.704
8 0.37 0.14 1.86 2.847
9 0.34 0.18 1.82 2.970
10 0.31 0.22 1.78 3.078
The X-bar Chart: Application to Call Center
Period x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 Mean Range
1
2
1.7
2.7
1.7
2.3
3.7
1.8
3.6
3
2.8
2.1
2.7
2.38
2
1.2
• Collect samples over time
3 2.1 2.7 4.5 3.5 2.9 3.14 2.4
4 1.2 3.1 7.5 6.1 3 4.18 6.3
5 4.4 2 3.3 4.5 1.4 3.12 3.1 • Compute the mean:
6 2.8 3.6 4.5 5.2 2.1 3.64 3.1
7 3.9 2.8 3.5 3.5 3.1 3.36 1.1
x1  x 2  ...  x n
8
9
16.5
2.6
3.6
2.1
2.1
3
4.2
3.5
3.3
2.1
5.94
2.66
14.4
1.4 X 
10
11
1.9
3.9
4.3
3
1.8
1.7
2.9
2.1
2.1
5.1
2.6
3.16
2.5
3.4
n
12
13
3.5
29.9
8.4
1.9
4.3
7
1.8
6.5
5.4
2.8
4.68
9.62
6.6
28
• Compute the range:
14 1.9 2.7 9 3.7 7.9 5.04 7.1
15
16
1.5
3.6
2.4
4.3
5.1
2.1
2.5
5.2
10.9
1.3
4.48
3.3
9.4
3.9 R  max{x1 , x2 ,...xn }
17 3.5 1.7 5.1 1.8 3.2 3.06 3.4
18
19
2.8
2.1
5.8
3.2
3.1
2.2
8
2
4.3
1
4.8
2.1
5.2
2.2
 min{x1 , x2 ,...xn }
20 3.7 1.7 3.8 1.2 3.6 2.8 2.6
21
22
2.1
3
2
2.6
17.1
1.4
3
1.7
3.3
1.8
5.5
2.1
15.1
1.6
as a proxy for the variance
23 12.8 2.4 2.4 3 3.3 4.78 10.4
24 2.3 1.6 1.8 5 1.5 2.44 3.5
25 3.8 1.1 2.5 4.5 3.6 3.1 3.4 • Average across all periods
26 2.3 1.8 1.7 11.2 4.9 4.38 9.5
27 2 6.7 1.8 6.3 1.6 3.68 5.1 - average mean
Average 3.81 5.85 - average range

• Normally distributed
 Control Charts: The X-bar Chart
• Define control limits
U
C
L
=
+
XA
×
R
2=
3
.
8
1+
0
.
5
8*
5
.
85
=
7
.
19
L
C
L
=
-
A
X×
=
R
23
.
8
1
-0
.
5
8
*5
.
8
5
=0
.
4
1
12
• Constants are taken from a table
10

8
• Identify assignable causes:
- point over UCL
6
- point below LCL
4 - many (6) points on one side of center
2
• In this case:
0 - problems in period 13
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27
- new operator was assigned

CSR 1 CSR 2 CSR 3 CSR 4 CSR 5

mean 2.95 3.23 7.63 3.08 4.26
st-dev 0.96 2.36 7.33 1.87 4.41
The Statistical Meaning of Six Sigma
Process capability measure
Lower Upper
Specification Specification
Limit (LSL) Limit (USL) USL  LSL
Cp 
6ˆ
Process A
(with st. dev A) x Cp P{defect} ppm
1 0.33 0.317 317,000
X-3A X-2A X-1A X X+1A X+2 X+3A

3
2 0.67 0.0455 45,500
3 1.00 0.0027 2,700
Process B 4 1.33 0.0001 63
(with st. dev B)

5 1.67 0.0000006 0,6

X
6 2.00 2x10-9 0,00
X-6B X+6B

• Estimate standard deviation: ̂ =R / d2

• Look at standard deviation relative to specification limits
• Don’t confuse control limits with specification limits: a process can be out of
control, yet be incapable
Attribute Based Control Charts: The p-chart
Period n defects p
1 300 18 0.060
2 300 15 0.050 • Estimate average defect percentage
3 300 18 0.060
4
5
300
300
6
20
0.020
0.067
p =0.052
6 300 16 0.053
7 300 16 0.053 • Estimate Standard Deviation
8 300 19 0.063
9 300 20 0.067 p (1  p )
10 300 16 0.053 ̂ = Sample Size
=0.013
11 300 10 0.033
12 300 14 0.047
13 300 21 0.070
14 300 13 0.043
15 300 13 0.043
• Define control limits
UCL= p + 3̂ =0.091
16 300 13 0.043
17 300 17 0.057
18 300 17 0.057
19 300 21 0.070 LCL= p- 3̂ =0.014
20 300 18 0.060
21 300 16 0.053
22 300 14 0.047 • DAV case:
23 300 33 0.110
24 300 46 0.153 - calibration period (capability analysis)
25
26
300
300
10
12
0.033
0.040
- conformance analysis
27 300 13 0.043
28 300 18 0.060
29 300 19 0.063
30 300 14 0.047
Attribute Based Control Charts: The p-chart

0.180
0.160
0.140
0.120
0.100
0.080
0.060
0.040
0.020
0.000
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Statistical Process Control
Capability Conformance
Analysis Analysis

Eliminate Investigate for

Assignable Cause Assignable Cause

Capability analysis
• What is the currently "inherent" capability of my process when it is "in control"?

Conformance analysis
• SPC charts identify when control has likely been lost and assignable cause
variation has occurred

Investigate for assignable cause

• Find “Root Cause(s)” of Potential Loss of Statistical Control

Eliminate or replicate assignable cause

• Need Corrective Action To Move Forward
How do you get to a Six Sigma Process?
Step 1: Do Things Consistently (ISO 9000)
1. Management Responsibility
2. Quality System
3. Contract review
4. Design control
5. Document control
6. Purchasing / Supplier evaluation
7. Handling of customer supplied material
8. Products must be traceable
9. Process control
10. Inspection and testing
11. Inspection, Measuring, Test Equipment
12. Records of inspections and tests
13. Control of nonconforming products
14. Corrective action
15. Handling, storage, packaging, delivery
16. Quality records
17. Internal quality audits
18. Training
19. Servicing
20. Statistical techniques

Examples: “The design process shall be planned”,

“production processes shall be defined and planned”
Step 2: Reduce Variability in the Process
The Idea of Taguchi: Even Small Deviations are Quality Losses

Quality Quality Loss = C(x-T)2

Loss
Performance
Metric, x

Good

Performance
Metric
Bad
Minimum Target Maximum Target
acceptable value acceptable value
value value

It is not enough to look at “Good” vs “Bad” Outcomes

Only looking at good vs bad wastes opportunities for learning; especially as failures
become rare (closer to six sigma) you need to learn from the “near misses”

Catapult: Land “in the box” opposed to “perfect on target”

Step 3: Accommodate Residual Variability
Through Robust Design
Chewiness of Brownie=F1(Bake Time) + F2(Oven Temperature)

F1 F2

25 min. 30 min. Bake Time 350 F 375 F Oven

Temperature
Design A

Design B

• Double-checking (see Toshiba)

• Fool-proofing, Poka yoke (see Toyota)
• Process recipe (see Brownie)
Pictures from www.qmt.co.uk
The Case of Jesica Santillam

Jesica Santillam, 17, has waited three years for donor

organs to become available.   (Photo: AP)

Line of Causes leading to the mismatch

• Jaggers did not take home the list of blood types
• Coordinator initially misspelled Jesica’s name
• Once UNOS identified Jesica, no further check on blood type
• Little confidence in information system / data quality
• Pediatric nurse did not double check
• Harvest-surgeon did not know blood type
The Case of Jesica Santillam (ctd)

“We didn’t have enough checks”, Ralph Snyderman, Duke University Hospital

Not the first death in organ transplantation because of blood type mismatch

As a result of this tragic event, it is clear to us at Duke that we need to have more robust
processes internally and a better understanding of the responsibilities of all partners
involved in the organ procurement process," said William Fulkerson, M.D., CEO of Duke
University Hospital.
Why Having a Process is so Important:
Two Examples of Rare-Event Failures
Case 1: Process does not matter in most cases
• Airport security
• Safety elements (e.g. seat-belts)

1 problem every 10,000 units “Bad” outcome only happens

Every 10 Mio units
99% correct
Case 2: Process has built-in rework loops
• Double-checking
• Jesica’s case

99%
Good

99% 99%

1%
Bad
1% 1%

“Bad” outcome only happens with probability (1-0.99) 3

Learning should be driven by process deviations, not by defects

The Three Steps in the Case of Jesica

Step 1: Define and map processes

- Jaegger had probably forgotten the list with blood groups 20 times before
- Persons involved in the process did not double-check,
everybody checked sometimes
- Learning is triggered following deaths / process deviations are ignored

Step 2: Reduce variability

- quality of data (initially misspelled the name)

Step 3: Robust Design

- color coding between patient card / box holding the organ
- information system with no manual work-around
To End with a Less Sad Perspective:
Predicting Distance can be Important…

© www.jochen-schweizer.de