... or did you think and investigate the blatant Six Sigma Scam?
This 50 second video shows the DUE DILIGENCE that everyone should have done:
https://lnkd.in/g_-hw62H
The scam started with Mr Bill Smith. He had a wildly out of control molding process that happened to drift "as much as 1.5 sigma" because of tampering.
Mikel Harry created the Six Sigma Scam by "proving" Smith's drift/shift happened for all processes, every 50 measurements. Harry said the 1.5 sigma shift was the "pillar" of his Six Sigma. Harry reveals all in his "Mysteries of Six Sigma".
When I first encountered this rubbish, I gave Harry the benefit of the doubt and assumed it was simply incompetence. I later encountered one of Harry's ex Motorola workmates, who pointed out that Six Sigma was built with a clear intention to deceive. With 138 pages of intentional obfuscation, Harry knew that few people would investigate as I have done.
Harry's ex workmate explains: "First of all, we all knew Mikel was full of s***. Mikel ran across Bender when looking for "proof" of the 1.5. Dr. Z and I were with him a week or so later and when asked to explain Bender, he could not. It was not a misinterpretation, Mikel depended on people not taking time to understand - he knew it was bull***t. He didn't think anyone would call him on it. Besides I had already shown him two years of data from a Motorola factory in Seguin, TX that had minute movement over time, not 1.5."
Even Motorola management knew Harry's Six Sigma was trash: "Just know the work of Mikel did not influence anyone at the operating level of Motorola."
Many corrupt consultants now claim that Six Sigma has nothing to do with 'six sigma' and its fraudulent foundations. EVERY aspect of Six Sigma is worthless:
- its defect counts
- its ignorance of the meaning of quality "on target with minimum variance".
- its nomalization nonsense
- its irrelevant enumerative methods
- its DMAIC, "muddled, imprecise, impotent, incapacitated, rudderless." - Harry's workmate, Bhote.
- its nonsense terminology, such as 'long term' variation
- its padded courses, filled with irrelevant material and endless tools
- 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" in the farce.
- its own failure to ANALYZE and INVESTIGATE
There is never justification to turn your back on the great men of quality, Dr Shewhart, Professor Ishikawa, Professor Lewis, Professor Deming, Dr Chambers and Dr Wheeler, for a self-confessed con man's fraud.
by Dr Tony Burns BE (Hon 1) PhD (Chem Eng)