On one of my previous posts, I asked what is more important to you, and to your organization, is it Six Sigma or Innovation?
This time, let's talk about Six Sigma vs ISO (specifically ISO 9001, or Quality Management Systems, since there are hundreds of ISO standards).
I am not fond of comparing Six Sigma to other quality initiatives, but these are usual questions I get from executives and quality practitioners.
In fact, I remember this question from iSixSigma thread way back in 2007, where one executive asked:
"ISO and Six Sigma – where is the connection? Why do we need both? Can we live without one or the other? Should they both remain as they serve different purposes? Should one yield to the other and integrate before dissolving? What are your thoughts?"
The scope of comparing the two quality initiatives is as wide as the pacific ocean. Since this blog post is only as big as a surfboard, it would be impossible for me to cover everything. I would also like to get insights from you, dear readers, and fellow quality practitioners so we could learn from one another.
Main Goal
The goal of ISO 9001 are standardization and compliance.
Standardization means making your processes the same, which would result to having your customers receive a "similar" service or product every time, all the time, whenever, wherever. It means receiving a "similar quality" burger from your favorite fast food chain wherever (branch), whenever, every time, all the time. It also means, that even if you have 3 people making your burger in a branch, all three would create "same quality" burger.
Compliance means ensuring that what is "really" happening on your production floor, offices, warehouse, etc. are SIMILAR to the processes written on your Operations Manual and Work instructions. If there are differences, you should either update your documentation, or align actual processes to your manuals.
Six Sigma, on the other hand, drives change for the better. The heart of six sigma initiatives are process improvement projects, which aims to "change" the current process to the ideal process and in turn would lead to reduction of process defects, delays, and variations.
What is interesting is this: in the CONTROL Phase, the last phase of DMAIC (Six Sigma methodology), project teams ensure that the "new/ improved" process shall be the new standard to avoid recurring of defects. If Six Sigma is also used by an ISO company, it is a must for the team and process owners update their operations manual to reflect the improved process and make it the new standard, and let everyone comply to it.
Certification
Six Sigma certifies individuals, while ISO certifies companies. ISO certifying bodies certify companies that complies to ISO standards. Six Sigma initiatives certify individuals, after satisfying requirements set by the person or institution. ISO has a central certifying body, while Six Sigma has none. Due to that, one big risk companies and individuals should look into is the quality of a Six Sigma training program. You will only be as good as the person or institution that will certify you.
At iAcademy School of Continuing Education, where I am the Lean Six Sigma Program Director, we strictly maintain the following standards before we certify an individual as Six Sigma Green or Black Belt:.
1. Attend learning sessions/ lectures (100% attendance for Green Belt; 85% Black Belt)
2 . Pass practical and written examinations (60% passing score)
3. Complete an actual Six Sigma project by hitting the goal and show proper use of six sigma tools and methodology.
4. Mentor a green belt candidate to complete his/her project (For Black Belt only)
ROI
This is where Six Sigma is way ahead than ISO. Both programs require significant investments in terms of money, time, and resources, but in Six Sigma, you can get your ROI as fast as you finish your first few projects. Projects produce quantifiable soft & hard savings (affects your P&L), and executives love that. This is one main cause why Six Sigma is still widely used today.
Critical Success Factors
Both programs in my opinion, share similar critical success factors: Support from the top management; Competent program manager (Black Belt for Six Sigma, QMR for ISO); Alignment of initiatives to support management strategies; and support from critical mass.
Now, I give you back the question asked by the Executive on iSixSigma forum. Share your thoughts and let everyone learn something new today.
"ISO and Six Sigma – where is the connection? Why do we need both? Can we live without one or the other? Should they both remain as they serve different purposes? Should one yield to the other and integrate before dissolving? What are your thoughts?"
This time, let's talk about Six Sigma vs ISO (specifically ISO 9001, or Quality Management Systems, since there are hundreds of ISO standards).
I am not fond of comparing Six Sigma to other quality initiatives, but these are usual questions I get from executives and quality practitioners.
In fact, I remember this question from iSixSigma thread way back in 2007, where one executive asked:
"ISO and Six Sigma – where is the connection? Why do we need both? Can we live without one or the other? Should they both remain as they serve different purposes? Should one yield to the other and integrate before dissolving? What are your thoughts?"
The scope of comparing the two quality initiatives is as wide as the pacific ocean. Since this blog post is only as big as a surfboard, it would be impossible for me to cover everything. I would also like to get insights from you, dear readers, and fellow quality practitioners so we could learn from one another.
Main Goal
The goal of ISO 9001 are standardization and compliance.
Standardization means making your processes the same, which would result to having your customers receive a "similar" service or product every time, all the time, whenever, wherever. It means receiving a "similar quality" burger from your favorite fast food chain wherever (branch), whenever, every time, all the time. It also means, that even if you have 3 people making your burger in a branch, all three would create "same quality" burger.
Compliance means ensuring that what is "really" happening on your production floor, offices, warehouse, etc. are SIMILAR to the processes written on your Operations Manual and Work instructions. If there are differences, you should either update your documentation, or align actual processes to your manuals.
Six Sigma, on the other hand, drives change for the better. The heart of six sigma initiatives are process improvement projects, which aims to "change" the current process to the ideal process and in turn would lead to reduction of process defects, delays, and variations.
What is interesting is this: in the CONTROL Phase, the last phase of DMAIC (Six Sigma methodology), project teams ensure that the "new/ improved" process shall be the new standard to avoid recurring of defects. If Six Sigma is also used by an ISO company, it is a must for the team and process owners update their operations manual to reflect the improved process and make it the new standard, and let everyone comply to it.
Certification
Six Sigma certifies individuals, while ISO certifies companies. ISO certifying bodies certify companies that complies to ISO standards. Six Sigma initiatives certify individuals, after satisfying requirements set by the person or institution. ISO has a central certifying body, while Six Sigma has none. Due to that, one big risk companies and individuals should look into is the quality of a Six Sigma training program. You will only be as good as the person or institution that will certify you.
At iAcademy School of Continuing Education, where I am the Lean Six Sigma Program Director, we strictly maintain the following standards before we certify an individual as Six Sigma Green or Black Belt:.
1. Attend learning sessions/ lectures (100% attendance for Green Belt; 85% Black Belt)
2 . Pass practical and written examinations (60% passing score)
3. Complete an actual Six Sigma project by hitting the goal and show proper use of six sigma tools and methodology.
4. Mentor a green belt candidate to complete his/her project (For Black Belt only)
ROI
This is where Six Sigma is way ahead than ISO. Both programs require significant investments in terms of money, time, and resources, but in Six Sigma, you can get your ROI as fast as you finish your first few projects. Projects produce quantifiable soft & hard savings (affects your P&L), and executives love that. This is one main cause why Six Sigma is still widely used today.
Critical Success Factors
Both programs in my opinion, share similar critical success factors: Support from the top management; Competent program manager (Black Belt for Six Sigma, QMR for ISO); Alignment of initiatives to support management strategies; and support from critical mass.
Now, I give you back the question asked by the Executive on iSixSigma forum. Share your thoughts and let everyone learn something new today.
"ISO and Six Sigma – where is the connection? Why do we need both? Can we live without one or the other? Should they both remain as they serve different purposes? Should one yield to the other and integrate before dissolving? What are your thoughts?"
