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
1 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.
Hoerl-Snee Strategy
Tuesday November 3, 2009
Process Improvement Strategies
Posted by: Gordon Clark at 7:09PM CST on November 3, 2009

A set of fundamental principles define Statistical Thinking, and these principles appear above in the introductory statements to this blog.    A number of different approaches exist for applying Statistical Thinking to improve quality.   Call these approaches Process Improvement Strategies.    The Statistics Division has promoted one originally defined by Hoerl and Snee (1995).    This is the same process improvement strategy described in detail by Britz, Emerling, et al (2000) and Hoerl and Snee (2002).   Call this process improvement strategy the Hoerl-Snee strategy.  

Six Sigma has another process improvement strategy.    Six Sigma uses the DMAIC steps which are Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control.  The DMAIC steps differ from the Hoerl-Snee process improvement strategy.   Our blog posting on January 13, 2008 points out that Statistical Thinking is a crucial concept in Six Sigma.   Clearly Six Sigma regards work as a system of interconnected processes, looks for variation in all processes, and regards understanding and reducing variation as keys to success.

Each element in the Hoerl-Snee strategy maps to an element in the DMAIC strategy.   However, the author thinks that the Hoerl-Snee strategy is more explicit and easier to understand.

The Shainin SystemTM or Statistical Engineering has another approach to quality improvement.   See Shainin (1995) for an overview or Steiner and MacKay (2005) for improvements to Statistical Engineering.   Statistical Engineering does use Statistical Thinking.   Its process improvement strategy places more emphasis on finding and eliminating a dominant cause (The Red X) than the Hoerl-Snee and Six Sigma strategies.  Statistical Engineering does not differentiate between special and common causes.   Also, it places less emphasis on advance planning prior to data gathering.   In addition, Statistical Engineering does not explicitly separate special causes from common causes so that it more effectively identifies the causes and eliminates them.

Approach in Subsequent Postings

First, we will specify the Hoerl-Snee strategy.   This strategy will be illustrated by example applications which we will present next.   After that we will discuss the differences between the three strategies mentioned above.   Case studies will illustrate the differences. 

References

  1. Hoerl, R. W. and R. D. Snee (1995). Redesigning the Introductory Statistics Course. Madison, Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin, Center for Quality and Productivity Improvement.
  2. Britz, G. C., D. W. Emerling, et al. (2000). Improving Performance Through Statistical Thinking. Milwaukee, WI, ASQ Quality Press.
  3. Hoerl, R. and R. D. Snee (2002). Statistical Thinking - Improving Business Performance. Pacific Grove, CA, Duxbury.
  4. Shainin, R. D. (1995). A Common Sense Approach to Quality Management. 49th Annual Quality Congress Proceedings.
  5. Steiner, S. H. and R. J. MacKay (2005). Statistical Engineering: An Algorithm for Reducing Variation in Manufacturing Processes. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ASQ Quality Press.