| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| articles:pdca-how_we_miss_shewarts_point [2021/07/10 15:11] – [A Major PDCA / PDSA Cycle Obstacle] rrandall | articles:pdca-how_we_miss_shewarts_point [2021/07/15 20:21] (current) – [A Better Alternative] rrandall |
|---|
| |
| Major obstacles for users of the PDCA / PDSA Cycle concept are observed when encountering either: | Major obstacles for users of the PDCA / PDSA Cycle concept are observed when encountering either: |
| | * "Process Capability" limitations |
| * "State-of-the-Art" limitations | * "State-of-the-Art" limitations |
| * a "technical contradiction" | * a "technical contradiction" |
| |
| A "State-of-the-Art" limitation is where the equipment/instrumentation has reached the current limits in current technology. It is simply impossible to improve further UNTIL advances are made in those other areas. | A "Process Capability" limitation is where the totality of a process (e.g., equipment/instrumentation limitations) has reached the limits of its capability. It is simply impossible to improve any further without a complete re-design of the process. |
| | |
| | A "State-of-the-Art" limitation is where the equipment/instrumentation has reached the limits in current technology. It is simply impossible to improve further UNTIL advances are made in those other areas. |
| |
| A "Technical Contradiction" is a situation that emerges when an attempt to improve a certain attribute (parameter) of a system leads to an unacceptable degradation of another attribute (parameter) of the same system. | A "Technical Contradiction" is a situation that emerges when an attempt to improve a certain attribute (parameter) of a system leads to an unacceptable degradation of another attribute (parameter) of the same system. |
| To learn more about TRIZ and the 40 TRIZ Principles, explore the [[https://triz-journal.com/|TRIZ Journal]]. | To learn more about TRIZ and the 40 TRIZ Principles, explore the [[https://triz-journal.com/|TRIZ Journal]]. |
| |
| | ===== A Better Alternative ===== |
| | |
| | Clearly, "continuous improvement" of any individual process has its limits. However, few companies reach that point where they're struggling to improve further. Ultimately, improvements take place in spurts. |
| | |
| | Rather than use the PDCA model, a much better approach is to follow the DMAIC model (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control). As improvements are made, the PDCA cycle fails to address "Control" (sustainment) of the improvement... to ensure that the process doesn't revert to its previous condition. |
| | |
| | {{ :articles:dmaic-aug-2019-01.png?direct |}} |
| |
| | As you move from one process to another, utilizing DMAIC, you can re-visit any of the processes previously improved to determine whether another DMAIC would be appropriate (for greater improvements). |
