Executives, specialists, and employees have praised the Six Sigma continuous process improvement methodology for years. Companies that employ this methodology have enhanced their products, services, and procedures. In addition, they increased productivity, customer satisfaction, and profitability due to their ability to reduce defects. Less frequently discussed are the obstacles that prevent the implementation of Six Sigma. No discussion of Six Sigma implementation is complete without discussing the obstacles organizations face when implementing Six Sigma in quality management and how to overcome them.
To enhance your career in quality management, attend Quality by Design training from Invensis Learning to learn improvements in manufacturing quality through reduced operating costs, process efficiencies, and compliance with increasing regulatory standards. Here are some common obstacles to implementing a QMS in six sigma within an organization and advice on eliminating them.
Challenge 1: The Culture of Departmental Management
“It is often difficult to change an established corporate culture that has developed over time.” Even in contemporary manufacturing, quality management is commonly depicted as the responsibility of the department tasked with implementing it, such as the quality control or quality assurance department. Professionals in quality management must recognize that quality management cannot operate in isolation. Any quality management effort should be an enterprise-wide initiative involving every aspect of the organization, from the CEO to the maintenance crew.
Challenge 2: Resistance to Technological Innovation
“Innovation is more than just a shift in daily practices; it is the creation and adoption of new technologies to enhance quality. In manufacturing, technological innovation has limitless impacts, frequently resulting in significant changes to systems, processes, machinery requirements, and skill sets. This resistance creates obstacles to effective quality management. Employees and middle managers tended to embrace change, whereas upper management viewed it as an additional dump on resources and time. It brings us to the next barrier to change: legacy systems. Due to the substantial investments made, legacy systems do not appear to fade because companies want to maximize the remaining usefulness of legacy resources.
Challenge 3: The Unwillingness of Upper Management to Provide Additional Resources and Time
“In the EDB case study, managers agreed that they were more concerned with day-to-day operations than quality management, despite recognizing the latter’s importance. They argued that fixing errors and defects requires time. So they would rather delegate quality responsibilities to others so they can concentrate on their assigned tasks. As a result, upper management did not feel compelled to allocate the necessary resources to ensure optimal quality.”
Challenge 4: The Growing Complication of the Supply Chain
“Evolving manufacturing trends have compelled companies to expand into new regions with lower production costs, greater availability of raw materials, and qualified labor.” However, globalization has also created more complex supply chains that require global supply chain management, further complicating manufacturing quality management.”
Challenge 5: Poor Efficiency
Six Sigma quality improvement projects can fail even with the guidance of project champions and Master Black Belts if they are not properly executed. Poor execution occurs when process improvements are not in line with the organization’s objectives. And when the project is based on reactively solving problems rather than meeting strategic priorities. Or when the quality improvement project concentrates on the process’s output rather than the inputs. Six Sigma methodologies work best when they align with the organization’s goals and objectives. So companies are more likely to stay on track when they realize this.
Organizations that employ the Six Sigma methodology but do not realize the anticipated productivity gains or cost savings are not disappointed because the methodology is ineffective. The most likely cause of their dissatisfaction is ineffective leadership and inefficient project management. However, when leadership is committed to applying the Six Sigma methodology, top talent is assigned to project teams, the project undergoes a formal selection and review process, and the necessary resources are allocated, the likelihood of Six Sigma success increases dramatically.
Towards a Holistic Approach: Implementing a Quality Management System
Beyond reducing the number of defects, addressing the price of quality requires evaluating the entire Quality Management System (QMS). Smart Manufacturers must employ a systemic approach to quality and comprehend the relationship between failure costs and costs of prevention. From Six Sigma projects to defect reduction and failure prevention, the effects of improving QMS processes range from defect reduction to defect elimination.
Conclusion
Implementing QMS assists personnel training and certification and equipment calibration. It reduces the cost of quality evaluation by utilizing automated statistical process control (SPC). And enabling processes for appraisal costs on suppliers, source and receiving inspection, and process audits. The outcome? Reduced quality failure costs.
There is an organic trade-off between how much an organization spends on prevention. And how much it spends on repairing failures. Therefore, in addition to the traditional method of reducing the cost of quality by reducing the number of defects. It is also possible to reduce the cost of quality by improving the efficiency of the quality management system.
