If you have read anything about Six Sigma, you probably know that, among other benefits, it is about reducing the variation in the process. Some instructors even teach their students the mantra, “Variation is Evil!”

You can probably guess where I am going with this discussion, but please read on. Several years ago, I talked with a successful Six Sigma consultant/instructor (not one who ever taught for the TQM Network). He received his Six Sigma training at GE and was now contracting with other large organizations. For a time, he also taught for one of the original Six Sigma consulting firms – you know the one with the “cowboy” photos. That firm had enjoyed great success and business had expanded rapidly. To accommodate the growth, they hired a number of independent contractors to deliver the training and support. Everyone was to use the instructional materials developed by the original team.

The consultant with whom I was talking explained that there was too much variation in the training and support process, even though everyone was supposedly using the same material. He was talking about one of the best-known Six Sigma consulting firms. He recognized that the knowledge and abilities of the instructor was a major factor in the level of success. In Black Belt “speak,” we would say that the instructor is a significant “X.”

Now, several years later, I am still convinced that variation in training and support is a major reason that many organizations either fail at Six Sigma or achieve only meager results. (Organizational leadership is the other key factor.)

It’s not like buying a car…

Some organizations treat the choice of a Lean Six Sigma training partner like choosing a new car. Define a few key parameters, read a few reviews, ask a few questions, get some quotes and choose someone. After all, just as all cars provide a basic standard of transportation, won’t all training partners provide an adequate level of service? In a word – NO! If we follow the car example, some end up with a pretty exterior, but with only a lawn mower engine under the hood. It is not surprising that these folks conclude after a few months that Lean Six Sigma just doesn’t work in their organization.

This is not your father’s Six Sigma…

I was first exposed to Six Sigma in 1997 when I was able to go through Green Belt training at GE here in Fort Wayne. Although many of the tools and principles are the same, the classes today are significantly different. In 1997, it was primarily about manufacturing. The critical role of leadership was not emphasized. Although we used paper helicopters and catapults in our training exercises, we did not have many real-life success stories about the application and deployment of Six Sigma. Unfortunately, many consultants/trainers “lock-in” their training materials and content when they leave GE or another organization – and do not stay at the leading edge of instruction.

So, how should I choose an instructional partner?

Here is a short list of characteristics I would require in an instructional partner:

• Solid understanding of the tools and methodology. This goes well beyond being able to teach and explain the tools by using a PPT presentation and some Minitab examples. Good students ask questions – sometimes tough questions. Good instructors know a lot more about the tools than they expect to teach. They need to be well versed in the methodology and which tools are applicable in which situation. (NOTE: Unless you are an expert in this area, you can easily be fooled in this evaluation.)
• Experience – lots of experience. How long has the instructor been teaching and leading Lean Six Sigma deployments? Has he/she worked with both large (Fortune 100) companies and small organizations? Has he/she led deployments in both transactional and manufacturing environments? Experience not only provides a wealth of real-world examples to share in class, but also helps each student realize that their particular situation is not really all that different from others who have had great success.
• Instructional Style. Observe the instructor in a real class for at least a full day. Does the instruction resemble a college lecture with better PPT slides and a few exercises? Are the students learning by listening and following along with printed materials, or are they being led to discover the material themselves? Does the instructor use humor and multiple forms of media? Are the students really engaged or are their minds wandering?
• Communication with all levels of leadership. Because the overall success of a Lean Six Sigma deployment is also very dependent on the commitment of organizational leadership, it is important that the instructor be equally effective in communicating with organizational leaders as well as with students. He/she must also be able to coach the student how to be effective within the organization, even if there is some resistance (as there always is).

How can the TQM Network help?

If your organization is considering Lean Six Sigma, or if you have had an unsuccessful experience trying to use it, I encourage you to take advantage of the TQM Network. If you are the decision-maker, I encourage you to attend the 2-day Leadership Training session on June 11 & 12. Bring your leadership team and your questions – your doubts – and an open mind. I believe that two days with Scott Lasater will not only answer your questions, but will also illustrate why you want your students to learn from him.

If you are not the final decision-maker in your organization, I still encourage you to attend this session. Bring 2-3 team members who can effectively share the results of the session with your leaders. We can even help you develop a strategy of next steps within your organization.

Conclusion

Let us all agree to reduce the variation in Lean Six Sigma instruction (and increase the mean value as well) by insisting on instructional partners who excel at the criteria listed above. We don’t want to settle for average!

>> Subscribe to get blog updates by email.