Con men use outlandish ideas to separate the naive from their cash. Empty promises are made to appeal to the ignorant. In the case of Six Sigma, the claim was that all processes were wildly out of control by 1.5 sigma ... and this was supposed to be good.
I have been abused both openly and indirectly on LinkedIn, for telling the truth about the Six Sigma Scam. Despite the abuse, no one has ever disputed my revelations, or provided evidence to the contrary. The common and cowardly approach by scammers is to block people who stand for honesty, integrity and Quality, so that con men can continue to hawk their trash to gullible innocents, without interference.
I find it disgusting that even industry bodies actively promote Six Sigma Scammers. Industry bodies are primary concerned with their own income, rather than leading members on the road to Quality.
Make no mistake. The creator of the Six Sigma Scam himself, stated "Six Sigma champions are con men. All you have is smoke and mirrors". Six Sigma was no magical statistical "discovery". It was intentional fraud from the very beginning, as I revealed here: Birth of a Fraud
Some con men claim Harry's statement is taken out of context. There is no "context" wherein it is ever OK to be a con man. It is unimaginable that the giants of Quality, Professor Deming, Dr Shewhart and Dr Wheeler, would recommend that anyone be a con man.
The Six Sigma Scam has been lucrative for its con men. There is still today, endless cover-up. For example, one PhD Six Sigma author working under the auspices of an industry body, proclaims "we only discuss the six sigma of Six Sigma in one paragraph". Con men do their best to bury the farce behind their fraud.
Con men try to brush the fraud off by implying that while Six Sigma may be built on farce, it has other good stuff. It doesn't. EVERY aspect of Six Sigma is worthless.
- its laughable foundations and 3.4 dpmo trash.
- its defect counts
- its ignorance of the meaning of quality "on target with minimum variance".
- its nomalization nonsense
- its irrelevant enumerative methods: "inappropriate, no application" - Deming
- its DMAIC: "muddled, imprecise, impotent, incapacitated, rudderless" - Bhote
- its nonsense terminology, such as 'long term' variation
- its padded courses, filled with irrelevant material, to justify ridiculous prices
- its failure to comprehend control charts, at the core of quality.
- its turning its back on the REAL experts - the workers.
- its building barriers with pseudo "experts".
- its own failure to ANALYZE and INVESTIGATE
Companies basing their future on Six Sigma are doomed. For example, a long term study at Ford showed an average of 1 in 5 parts defective AFTER improvement for "successful" Six Sigma projects. 91% of Six Sigma companies have failed and gone backwards.
Stand up to con men and industry bodies hawking destructive fraud.
by Dr Tony Burns BE (Hon 1) PhD (Chem Eng)