Six Sigma was designed by Motorola for use in its principally
manufacturing-based business. It's designed to eliminate errors in
manufacturing and business processes (and the latter was shoehorned
in). Its influence has spread out of all proportion to its usefulness
because it involves lots of numbers and processes which tend to make
bean-counters happy, because they make endeavors feel less like
herding cats.
Although it enjoys enormous popularity these days, I firmly believe
that using it in any area where just about every question can best be
answered by "It depends" and where the desired goal is a viceral or
intellectual human reaction rather than a perfect cell phone, is
seriously misguided at best and detrimental in nearly all cases.
Yes, you need to have processes available for people to use and refer
to, but requiring their use in every case is foolish. Yes, you need
to have goals for performance, but you don't necessarily measure
those goals the same way every time.
I have always avoided using it and companies that use it (or a
similar methodology) like the plague.
my .02
Katie
At 8:47 AM +0200 5/22/08, Zayera Khan wrote:
Hello,
I have recently come across Six Sigma methodology (also Design for Six
Sigma), and was wondering if anyone on the mailinglist has experience
applying this methodology when it comes to "design, user experience and
innovation"?
Do you think it can substitute or perhaps even promote user-centered design
approach in a business context?
I would be glad to get some tips about best practices and case studies
regarding this topic, thanks.
Regards,
Zayera
--
----------------
Katie Albers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
