Case Analysis Based Recommendation

profileDeonpalmgrove
MGT591_SQMMeasureandAnalyze_AssessmentAssignment.ppt

Six Sigma Analysis:
SQM Measure & Analyze Stage
Assessment Assignment

Presented by: Debo Ogunseinde

The below analysis is completed with data given, using all quality management tools previously learned/used in class.

*

Percentage of Employees out of work due to Injury

The percentage of employees that have been out of work as a result of injury has been increasing and is continuing to increase. This trend might continue to increase in any case measures will not be put in place. Urgent measures are needed so as to prevent the situation from worsening.

*

Pareto diagram showing number of Employees out of work due to Injury

The number of employees that have been out of work as a result of injury has been increasing as indicated by the many figures above the 18.9. This trend might continue to increase in any case measures will not be put in place. Urgent measures are needed so as to prevent the situation from worsening.

*

Cause and Effect Diagram Showing Source And Impact Of Injuries

Pushing

Carrying

Stepping

Injuries



Excessive Lifting

Pulling

Climbing

Back Injury

Falls

Broken bones

Head Injury

Cuts

Trips

Causes of injuries in the company results from such activities as excessive lifting, pulling, pulling, pushing, carrying and stepping. These activities results to back injuries,, falls, broken bones, head injuries, cuts and trips

*

Number of Injuries per Zone of the facility layout

There were no injuries recorded in zone 4. Zone 2 recorded the highest number of injuries. What this means is that there are low safety measures in this zone. In order to reduce injuries in this zone, it is important to educate employees on how they can protect themselves

*

Control chart showing Average number of Employees out of work due to Injury in the month of in April

The percentage of employees that have been out of work as a result of injury has been increasing and is continuing to increase. This trend might continue to increase in any case of measures not put in place. Urgent measures are needed so as to prevent the situation from worsening.

*

Number of Oil drops per area

Area 2a had the highest oil drops. A possible reason this could be increased risk for leakages. Area 3b had no oil drops. This could be as a result of increased safety against leakages.

*


Number of programs to reduce Percentage of employees that are out of work due to injury

The number of programs put in place so as to reduce the percentage of employees that are out of work has been irregular. In some cases, the number of programs has been high while in others low

*

Number of Training Hours

The number of hours spent on training for policy change was 0. the same case applied to training on reward system and punishment system.

*

Type of Injury with SOP

The type of injury with SOP has been varrying. The most widespread type of injury are cuts. What this implies is that new measures should emphasize on how to reduce cuts.

*

Work Loss Data

The number of hours that has been lost as a result of injuries has been varying in an increasing trend. The hours lost continue to increase and this mean loss of revenue.

*

References

Behara, R. S., Fontenot, G. F., & Gresham, A. (1995). Customer satisfaction measurement and analysis using Six Sigma. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 12(3), 9-18.

De Mast, J., & Lokkerbol, J. (2012). An analysis of the Six Sigma DMAIC method from the perspective of problem solving. International Journal of Production Economics, 139(2), 604-614.

Dinesh Kumar, U., Saranga, H., Ramírez-Márquez, J. E., & Nowicki, D. (2007). Six sigma project selection using data envelopment analysis. The TQM Magazine, 19(5), 419-441.

Drohomeretski, E., Gouvea da Costa, S. E., Pinheiro de Lima, E., & Garbuio, P. A. D. R. (2014). Lean, Six Sigma and Lean Six Sigma: an analysis based on operations strategy. International Journal of Production Research, 52(3), 804-824.

Harry, M. J., & Lawson, J. R. (1992). Six sigma producibility analysis and process characterization (pp. 2-3). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Pyzdek, T. (2003). The six sigma. McGrow-Hill, New York.