|
Xerox’s DMAIC Lean Six Sigma program could be characterized as being led by
a small, centralized Corporate Lean Six Sigma Office
.
This is not too different from many standard DMAIC Lean Six Sigma
deployments. Though this proved
effective for the Xerox’s early years of deployment, we came to the
conclusion that if Xerox was going to adopt DMAIC Lean Six Sigma as the “way
we worked”, there had to be a shift in ownership to the operational
organizations and away from the centralized Lean Six Sigma Office.
We still needed a formalized structure, framework and infrastructure
in place (for such critical items such as certification, training, and other
key functions) and managed centrally to ensure consistency and overall
program success. However, the
more the operations leaders internalized and actively participated in the
overall governance of the program, the higher the probability for a
pervasive and sustainable deployment.
This overall concept became even more important in our DfLSS deployment.
As mentioned before, each product delivery organization, and even
managers within those organizations, had different product delivery methods
and techniques. Even though
they all worked under the overall umbrella Xerox Time To Market
process,
within and across Divisions there still was a degree of process variability
that made it difficult to converge on a single agreed upon set of program
management methods and practices.
This decentralized product delivery methods model also made it
difficult for a centralized group, like the Corporate Lean Six Sigma Office,
to have significant influence.
This management independence made it difficult to push certain centralized
function initiatives through the organization.
We were faced with this scenario on numerous occasions and equated
the frustration of driving important initiatives forward in this environment
to “pushing on a rope.”
Though there were limited early successes, we were able to make more
significant strides with the Division managers and their DfLSS Deployment
Managers
when
they became more intimately involved in the overall DfLSS program
governance. This can be a
double edged sword, especially when there are widely divergent work
processes, procedures and perceptions.
But, as long as the participants are open minded and willing to
listen to their design and development peers, things can be implemented
smoothly.
1Norman
E. Fowler, “Lessons Learned from an Unconventional Design for Lean Six Sigma
Deployment”, Morrisville, NC, Lulu Press Inc., 2008.
|
