Occasionally we experience a design which so completely embodies a profound knowledge of the voice of the customer that we can only stand in amazement at the wisdom of the designer. Such was the case recently in a parking garage in downtown Columbus, OH when I noticed this sign providing directions to an Eye Clinic.

This sign couldn't have been larger - to the point of being humorous. Imagine: the designer actually understood that customers of the eye center might not be able to see very well! Now THAT is profound customer insight.

If only every Design for Lean Six Sigma project could be so tightly linked to customer requirements - contrast this experience with another example from the world of opthamology.

The first segment of this article (July 2008 Update) examined why Blended Learning is the best-in-class approach to Lean Six Sigma training.  The blended training model generally includes a mix of e-learning, classroom exercises, and coaching.  Blended training offers a minimum cost advantage of 50%, not even including student travel costs. Blended models are more flexible - the e-learning component can cater to a class size as small as a single student.  And, an emerging body of evidence indicates that blended learning is substantially more effective than classroom training alone. 

Let’s examine the “what should we teach?” question from a Lean perspective to identify waste.  The baseline condition is represented by the graphic below, which depicts the general current state of Lean Six Sigma DMAIC training (Green Belt and Black Belt).

Due to the single-batch nature of the classroom training model, the curriculum is designed to cover a body of knowledge that anticipates possible future use – but like all demand forecasts, is ultimately inaccurate.   Most projects are executed by drawing upon a much narrower body of knowledge than that taught in the typical training class. ... Click Here to read the whole article.

Introduction
Performance management is comprised of four major sets of activities:

1. Defining objectives and standards,
2. Allocating resources and taking actions to achieve the objectives,
3. Analyzing and reporting on results, and
4. Taking necessary corrective actions to mitigate risk and ensure success.

Organizations typically manage their long-term strategic performance independently from their short-term operational performance.  A frequent, unintentional, result of this approach is that strategic objectives are not achieved and operational objectives are.  This occurs because:

1. Operational objectives are not aligned with the strategic objectives,
2. Resource allocation priorities are given to short-term needs,
3. Most of management’s time is focused on the urgency of achieving quarterly results, and
4. Short-term success masks the risk to achieving strategy.

With the advent of the Balanced Scorecard for strategy management and Lean Six Sigma for process improvement, many organizations are sensing that there is potential for common ground between strategic and operational performance management but are struggling to articulate exactly what that common ground is and how it works.   ... Click Here to read the whole article.