ARMY AL&T


Department of the Army (DA)—and the time that it takes from start to finish, to include flow days, delays, and redos.


• Current Green Belt and Black Belt training is too long (two weeks and four weeks, respectively); it competes with mission needs. Can we reduce training time and focus the POI to better align the content between the two training levels?


• The expectations for the time it will take to complete belt projects are unrealistic, as we are an Army at war. Can we adjust LSS to our business and operational realities?


• The amount and levels of mandatory belt certification practices, policies, and procedures contradict CPI and LSS tenets. Can we adjust LSS to a more user-friendly, intuitive tool set, realizing that doing a first project does not make one an expert, but a novice practitioner whose expertise evolves with each project? Otherwise, LSS project completion and certification represent an LSS finish line, versus a starting line for LSS cultural development.


Understanding Excellence Americans expect and believe that our military, specifically our Army, is the world’s best. But excellence in business and performance do not happen by osmosis; we must make them happen through hard work, performance planning, and proper use of CPI tools and organizational metrics. Dr. Malcolm Ross O’Neill, ASAALT, said at the ASAALT Materiel Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology Review Nov. 1, 2010, that “LSS is a mind-set change.” If we wait for the best-intentioned individuals or groups to collectively disrupt their comfort zones and embark on change management, very little, if anything, will happen spontaneously.


The benefits of success and the costs of failure are equally great in every business endeavor. To foster success, there are


74 APRIL –JUNE 2011


organizations that use national criteria and established processes to systemi- cally advance their corporate vision for improved business performance. For example, the annual Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, named after the former U.S. Secretary of Commerce from 1981 to 1987, recognizes U.S. organizations in the business, health care, education, and nonprofit sectors for performance excellence. The Baldrige Award is the only formal recognition of performance excellence in both public and private U.S. organizations.


To receive a Baldrige Award, an organi- zation must develop an organizational management system that ensures continuous improvement in the deliv- ery of products and services, and further demonstrates efficient and effective operations in the following categories: leadership; strategic plan- ning; customer and market focus; measurement, analysis, and knowledge management; human resource focus; process management; and results.


In the past year, our PEO had five Project Management Offices and one Assistant PEO Office submit Malcolm Baldrige-type Level 1 and Level 2 applications. Our applications were part of our five-year quality plan. As a first step in building our culture, we submitted applications to the State of Alabama Quality Award Program.


Although all the PEO applicants believed they were fully engaged in the seven Malcolm Baldrige Award categories, they quickly realized that they could not demonstrate or prove their level of involvement in most, if not all, of the categories to the extent required. From the perspective of business and operational efficiency and effectiveness, they were getting the job done. However, there was still work to be done to further refine their business operations and practices to the level of excellence required for recognition. By doing the hard work of building their


applications, they realized that “good enough” was just not good enough for their business operations.


Not Just a Certification The issue here is to understand that there must be an organizational com- mitment to cultural change, versus simply counting completed projects, as an indication of involvement in CPI/ LSS. In the article “Mad Belt Disease: Over-Emphasis on Certification,” Gary A. Gack wrote: “An emerging trend— which can justifiably be labeled as a case of ‘Mad Belt Disease’—may be threatening the long-term credibility and success of Six Sigma. It is time for practitioners of Six Sigma to help stem the spread of what is beginning to look like an epidemic. This disturbing trend is the increasingly frantic emphasis on Green Belt or Black Belt certification.”


Gack further stated, “Six Sigma certi- fication must be based on results, not knowledge alone. The success of Six Sigma realized by leaders such as GE, Motorola, Raytheon and others always has been based on a carefully orches- trated deployment process that begins at the top and is fully supported by appro- priate infrastructure. This infrastructure includes coaching, mentoring and fact- based monitoring of results. Training and testing are among the less important elements of a successful deployment— necessary, but far from sufficient alone. Certification based only on knowledge is form without substance.”


That said, an organization that enables its practitioners to voice their issues, is willing to listen, and demonstrates its willingness to advance those issues to the ASAALT and the DA may be on the right path to creating an environment for cultural change.


Our PEO and employees had earned their CPI/LSS stripes and saw a need to “lean” LSS. They wanted to become more efficient and effective in the workplace, hopefully using an


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88