eover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85% Six Sigma projects are not immune from a failure. Just like any other business improvement initiative there are projects that don’t succeed. When projects aren’t successful, it is not the fault of the system itself but rather it is to do with the implementation and application of the system. Let’s face it, if the system itself was inadequate there would not be so many success stories.

Many people perceive a project as unsuccessful when it fails to meet the targeted savings. This is a view that needs to be questioned and may best be done by way of the example below.

A common metric for projects is ROI, Return on Investment. One might question whether not reaching a particular ROI number is a strictly a failure. For instance if the target ROI is 15% and the project ends up delivering a ROI of 10-12% would you really call it a failure? That’s a matter for individual organisations to decide. Personally, I think that having a return of this magnitude can still be considered successful. It’s just not quite as successful as initially hoped.

Further, I have recently heard of a manufacturing changeover project that was targeting a mold change of under a minute in an injection machine. The actual changeover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85% i

, if the system itself was inadequate there would not be so many success stories.

Many people perceive a project as unsuccessful when it fails to meet the targeted savings. This is a view that needs to be questioned and may best be done by way of the example below.

A common metric for projects is ROI, Return on Investment. One might question whether not reaching a particular ROI number is a strictly a failure. For instance if the target ROI is 15% and the project ends up delivering a ROI of 10-12% would you really call it a failure? That’s a matter for individual organisations to decide. Personally, I think that having a return of this magnitude can still be considered successful. It’s just not quite as successful as initially hoped.

Further, I have recently heard of a manufacturing changeover project that was targeting a mold change of under a minute in an injection machine. The actual changeover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85%

s ROI, Return on Investment. One might question whether not reaching a particular ROI number is a strictly a failure. For instance if the target ROI is 15% and the project ends up delivering a ROI of 10-12% would you really call it a failure? That’s a matter for individual organisations to decide. Personally, I think that having a return of this magnitude can still be considered successful. It’s just not quite as successful as initially hoped.

Further, I have recently heard of a manufacturing changeover project that was targeting a mold change of under a minute in an injection machine. The actual changeover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85%

ly, I think that having a return of this magnitude can still be considered successful. It’s just not quite as successful as initially hoped.

Further, I have recently heard of a manufacturing changeover project that was targeting a mold change of under a minute in an injection machine. The actual changeover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85%

eover time at the end of the project was 9 minutes. Was this a failure? To answer this question one would need to know what the baseline was. Prior to the improvement project the changeover time was over 60 minutes. Either way, this improvement is significant. An actual reduction in changeover time of 85% is still an excellent result.

So rather than be concerned about failure one should be concerned with making projects more successful and how better to meet the desired outcomes.

Some of the common reasons that Six Sigma implementations don’t always deliver the results are:-

• Overly optimistic targets
• Demanding too short payback periods
• Inadequately defined projects
• Projects not aligned to company objectives
• Not embracing the Six Sigma mindset
• Viewing it as a mathematical exercise
• Lack of commitment from Champions
• Training the wrong people
• Isolated and sporadic projects
• Lack of an “umbrella” project coordinating activities and resources
• Applying the wrong tools for the task at hand
• Providing insufficient time for staff to dedicate to project tasks
• Lack of an experienced mentor for new practitioners

As we can see, the range of factors for organisations not achieving their desired outcomes from Six Sigma projects are quite varied. What should be obvious is that none of these things are particularly difficult to resolve with the right help. Six Sigma training prov