1. Waste of Over-Training
�??Build to demand�?? is the mantra for Lean production. Yet when it comes to training employees on Lean Six Sigma methods and tools, the standard is �??teach it all upfront just-in-case you need it�??. Most Black and Green Belt training curriculums are modeled on a college or university lecture-driven course of study condensed into week long classes. These certification courses teach a deep body of knowledge organized around the Six Sigma DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control) project management model.
This approach creates waste in a number ways. First is the waste of re-learning. As is the case with physical inventory, knowledge that �??sits�?? or is rarely applied, is value lost and subject to obsolescence. In the case of Belt training, over-training creates a big demand for post-training class expert coaching and support, which adds costs and lengthens project cycle times.
Second is the waste that comes from the need to fill classes with bodies to justify the expense of delivering the training. The result is often more Belts than viable projects leading to �??make work�?? projects and idle resources.
2. Waste of Over-Analysis
If you were to think of performance improvement opportunities as customers to be served, the goal from a Lean perspective is to respond to each opportunity with just the right resources for the need. However, the norm in Lean Six Sigma deployments, is to treat all problems as equally complex.
Data, charts and statistical analyses often substitute for clear thinking, creativity and common sense. As a seasoned Black Belt commented, �??I think we are so enamored with the tools that we do statistical analyses not because it�??s needed, but because we know how to do it.�?? The end result of this �??one size fits all�?? problem-solving mentality is longer than required project cycle times and improvement opportunities left on the table because Belts are too busy �??running down the data�??.
3. Waste of Idle-Resources
Even at the peak of its popularity in the late 1980�??s companies using TQM (Total Quality Management) rarely achieved direct employee participation rates of more than 10 to 15 percent. Unfortunately, Lean Six Sigma has done no better. In fact, the percentage of employees actually participating on Lean Six Sigma project teams is usually less than five percent of the total workforce.
engagement deficit in better project selection and tracking of results, the method has made it harder, not easier, for rank and file employees to participate in continuous improvement due to its complex language and lengthy training requirements.
4. Waste of Project Waiting Time
Most Black Belts will tell you that the biggest drain on their productivity is wait time: Waiting for project resources; waiting for data; waiting for decisions, etc. As a result, the most expensive resource in Lean Six Sigma deployments - the Black Belt - is often the least productive on a return on investment basis. Waiting time produces fewer project completions per Black Belt and in many cases, Black Belt frustration, which in turn creates costly turn-over.
5. Waste of Complexity and Over-Investment
A popular handbook for deploying Lean Six Sigma lists over two hundred steps to establishing a robust infrastructure for Lean Six Sigma launch. While supporting processes and tools (such as project tracking software, communications programs, Champion training and the like) have utility, they often overwhelm attention on the primary objective: Improve and sustain better performance.
By the third year of deployment, many organizations have abandoned their initial Lean Six Sigma infrastructure and moved to a leaner, more responsive one. The cost of under-utilized infrastructure is rarely accounted for in deployments but it has contributed to the perception that Lean Six Sigma is not affordable for many organizations.
A recent survey of organizations deploying Lean Six Sigma reported that most organizations achieve break even return on investment within two years. But neither these results, nor other published reports of Lean Six Sigma success, take into account the significant �??hidden factory�?? costs that accompany the conventional path to Lean Six Sigma deployment.

While Lean Six Sigma makes up for some of this
1 Waste of Over-Training
Lean Six Sigma training follows a �??teach it all upfront just-in-case you need it approach�?? resulting in low-retention and high re-learning costs.
2 Waste of Over-Analysis
Treating all problems as equally complex, requiring data gathering and statistical analysis, results in longer than required project cycle times as well as improvement opportunities left on the table because Belts are too busy �??running down the data�??.
3 Waste of Idle-Resources
Lean Six Sigma has made it harder, not easier, for rank and file employees to participate in continuous improvement due to its complex language and lengthy training requirements.
4 Waste of Project Waiting Time
Waiting for project resources, data and decisions can make the most expensive resource in Lean Six Sigma deployments - Black Belts - the least productive on a return on investment basis.
5 Waste of Complexity and Over-Investment
Supporting processes and tools (such as project tracking software, communications programs, Champion training and the like) often overwhelm attention on the primary objective: Improve and sustain better performance.

This blog post has been written by moderator,Ali R. Hobeheidar of the group "XING Society for Quality".

Visit the group here: http://www.xing.com/net/xsq/