Members Log In to My ASQ Members Log In   View Shopping Cart Shopping Cart   Quality Progress Magazine Quality Progress Magazine Make Good Great
Communities & Networking

Overview

Communities

Regional

Topic / Industry

Get Started
Sign Out | Account Settings
Rate This Blog
0 rating(s)
Latest Entries
Loading...
Links
Loading...
Loading...
Search:
Statistical Thinking to Improve Quality
This blog examines the use of data analyses and statistical tools in a framework of statistical thinking to improve quality. The following principles form the basis for statistical thinking:

* All work occurs in a system of interconnected processes,
* Variation exists in all processes, and
* Understanding and reducing variation are keys to success.

Statistical thinking significantly improves the effectiveness of data analyses and statistical tools.
Analyze Common-Cause Variation A
Posted by: Gordon Clark on October 29, 2009 at 5:59PM CST
An additional example appears below illustrating the Analyze Common-Cause Variation step, step 6, in the Hoerl-Snee process improvement strategy.   Refer to the posting on 5/18/2008 for a description of this step.   Following the example, the posting summarizes some suggestions by Breyfogle (2003) to assist in stratification and disaggregation.

Histogram – Stratification.   The posting on 3/25/2008 describes statistical thinking by a team at Ricoh’s Numazu plant.   The plant makes raw material used as ingredients for copy machine toner.  The team wanted to reduce variation in output quantity which indicated a lack of control of the underlying process.   After removing a special cause, the team constructed a histogram of the output quantity.   The histogram clearly displayed excessive variation and two peaks.   The process flow chart showed a split after phase 2 into 2 separate lines, i.e., line A and line B.   Separate histograms for the two lines showed the output from line B was consistently lower that line A.  Constructing separate histograms for the two lines illustrates stratification by line.  Next, the team conducted a brainstorming session to formulate their collective thinking about the causes of excessive variation and the differences between the two lines.   They documented the results with a cause and effect diagram.   The brainstorming session and the construction of a cause and effect diagram illustrate step 7, Study Cause & Effect.

Stratification requires identifying a stratification factor, such as time of the day, and the partitioning of this factor into logical categories.   What tools may we use to aid in the selection of a stratification factor?    The team in the example above noticed two peaks in a histogram.   Breyfogle (2003) provides some guidance for this question.

  1. On page 220, Breyfogle states that patterns on a control chart may suggest the need for stratification.   A sequence of points with small up and down variation relative to the control limits may suggest that the sequence of points comes from a single strata.   The opposite situation where a sequence of points that do not have values near the center line may indicate the combination of two strata.
  2. On page 385, Breyfogle suggests dividing the data into categories based on posing basic questions such as who, what, when and where.

Disaggregation may be aided by constructing a process map such as the one used in the posting on 2/21/08.    The process map (Breyfogle, 2003, p. 103) is a flowchart with key process input variables listed for each step in the process.

References

1.     Breyfogle, F. W. (2003). Implementing Six Sigma. Hoboken, New Jersey, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.


 

(0) Comments
Loading...