Implementing six Sigma at GE

Journal for Quality and Participation, The, Jul/Aug 1998 by Hendricks, Candace A, Kelbaugh, Richard L

Coordination of the projects being done is also absolutely crucial. If controls aren't in place, it is easy to have duplicate or limitedbenefit projects being worked, wasting valuable resources. After numerous attempts to meet this challenge, a necessary bureaucracy was established, which is now serving us well. Each person must apply for training; and, as part of his or her application, a project description must be included-signed off on by an upper-level manager and the Master Black Belt for that functional area. This ensures that we are working on what the business cares about, and on issues that really matter.

C) MAINTENANCE. Visualizing the GE Appliances work force in the year 2000, we see all employees fully trained and actively utilizing the Six Sigma methodology. This goal is clear, and the organization and business structure are in place to make it happen. But how can sustainability of this vision be assured?

By the end of 1998, the most frequently asked question by any GE Appliances' manager will be, "Are you sure you took enough data?" This is the first step toward assuring a Six Sigma culture in the future.

Truly changing behavior over the long term requires that the Six Sigma goals be internalized on an individual level. To this end, several human resources-based actions have been put into effect. As previously mentioned, no one within any of the 12 General Electric businesses will be promoted without the full Six Sigma training and a completed project. This in itself is an impressive behavior-driver.

However, two other related actions complement this requirement: specific Six Sigma sections have been added to the annual performance evaluation form, and executive incentive compensation is awarded based on achievement of Six Sigma goals.

A key element of the success of the Six Sigma implementation at GE Appliances lies in the willingness to adapt and make changes in the process when necessary. False starts and execution issues have been turned into opportunities for continuous improvement rather than finger-pointing. Even with all of this learning, however, there are two general areas that would merit some reengineering if we had the opportunity to start over from the beginning: infrastructure and communication.

I. INFRASTRUCTURE. Conversion to a Six Sigma culture is an enormous undertaking. Many people have to be directly involved, and many support systems have to be in place to make it all work smoothly. In the beginning, GE Appliances approached Six Sigma on a relatively small scale. It's a difficult decision for a resource-limited, bottomline-driven business to commit a substantial number of people to work on Six Sigma projects fulltime, and we chose not to make the commitment until Cote came on board in mid 1996. As a result, we lost precious time. Creating the resource infrastructure up front would have begun the momentum much sooner, and allowed us to realize more dollar and defectreduction benefits.

Human resources are but one element of the infrastructure needed to support Six Sigma projects. This became abundantly clear as we began our Six Sigma focus in our manufacturing operations. In many cases, the measurement systems needed to be developed-or were not repeatable or reproducible enough to be used. Not having adequate gauges or control systems in our factories represented a major roadblock to implementation of early projects.