the application of six sigma methodologies to university ...aabri.com/manuscripts/111045.pdfare six...

The application of

university processes

Texas A&M University





ABSTRACT

The first student Six Sigma team (activated under

course and curriculum approval process. The goal

shorten process cycle time and reduce confusion about how the process works. Members of this

team developed flowcharts on how the process is supposed to work (by procedure) and how it

works in reality. The reality flowchart

two flowcharts were compared & integrated. Then the process was streamlined by making many

serial approval steps simultaneous. The team members briefed

their input, and validated the proposed process revision.

reduction of cycle time by 78.9%.

To fully implement the revised process, technological changes

Key Words: Six Sigma, University Processes,

Indicators, Stakeholders

Journal of Case Studies in Accreditation and Assessment

The application of Six Sigma methodologies, Page

application of Six Sigma methodologies to

university processes: The use of student teams

Mildred Golden Pryor

Texas A&M University-Commerce

Christine Alexander


Sonia Taneja


Sowmya Tirumalasetty


Deepthi Chadalavada


The first student Six Sigma team (activated under a QEP Process Sub-team) evaluated the

course and curriculum approval process. The goal was to streamline the process and thereby



works in reality. The reality flowchart was developed by interviewing process stakeholders. The


serial approval steps simultaneous. The team members briefed process stakeholders, received

nd validated the proposed process revision. The revised process resulted in a

reduction of cycle time by 78.9%. The procedure has been written to reflect the new process.

To fully implement the revised process, technological changes are being made as wel

, University Processes, Student Teams, Key Performance


methodologies,

methodologies to

ms

team) evaluated the

mline the process and thereby



was developed by interviewing process stakeholders. The


process stakeholders, received

The revised process resulted in a

The procedure has been written to reflect the new process.

made as well.

, Key Performance

INTRODUCTION

Drake, Sutterfield, and Ngassam (2008) emphasize that “Six Sigma is a discipline that

has revolutionized many corporations. It has literally transformed them from a state of loss to

one of profitability. It can be used to improve any process . . . whether one used for tangible

products or services” (p. 29). While universities are not typically viewed as “profit

institutions, their leaders have to be concerned with improving quality, reducing costs, and

meeting customer and other stakeholder requirements.

Bandyopadhyay and Lichtman (2007)

United States have been continuously striving for higher quality under the continu

public scrutiny, budget crunches

suggest that Six Sigma can be used to improve quality and producti

learning. The authors agree and suggest that Six Sigma can

accreditation efforts and (2) to involve students in the co

university processes. The involvement of stude

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools

universities, colleges, and schools.

Plan (QEP). A sub-team of QEP at Texas A&M University

under the auspices of which are s

evaluated the course and curriculum approval process. Members of the team included

graduate students in the Department of Industrial and Engineering Technology

Management and Management Information

are Six Sigma Green Belts. An MBA student who is a Six Sigma Black Belt

supported the team. The Six Sigma champion was the Associate Vice President for Academic

Affairs. Faculty members in Management, Industrial and Engineering Technology, and

Management Information Systems were available as advisors as ne

in-depth discussion of the University

information about Six Sigma in universities and other educational institutions as well as a

literature review of the historical

HISTORY AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATION OF SIX SIGMA

Six Sigma may be categorized as an organization

initiative that is focused on financial results

and a statistical measure of process/product capability

from the work of many quality pioneers, Six Sigma aims for virtually error free performance. As

an initiative, Six Sigma originated at

challenge to reduce product-failure levels tenfold in five years. Meeting this challenge required

swift and accurate responses from Motorola employees (Harry, 2000).

Mikel Harry and Bill Smith were engineers who worked together at Motorola, the

company at which Six Sigma was first used both as an organization

and a statistical tool. According to

(2000), Bill Smith was the originator of the

requirements for top management support and structured implementation, Six Sigma

rigorous application of statistical tools to increase profits, reduce costs, and

speed. It uses a structured systems approach to problem solving and strongly links initial




corporations. It has literally transformed them from a state of loss to

It can be used to improve any process . . . whether one used for tangible

While universities are not typically viewed as “profit


meeting customer and other stakeholder requirements.

Bandyopadhyay and Lichtman (2007) state that “. . . universities and . . . colleges in the

d States have been continuously striving for higher quality under the continu

and cuts in private, state and federal funding” (p. 802). They

suggest that Six Sigma can be used to improve quality and productivity in institut

agree and suggest that Six Sigma can also be used (1) to support

to involve students in the co-management and improvement of

The involvement of students also supports accreditation efforts.

The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) is an accrediting agency

universities, colleges, and schools. One of the requirements of SACS is a Quality Enhancement

team of QEP at Texas A&M University-Commerce is the Process Team

student Six Sigma teams. The first student Six Sigma team

evaluated the course and curriculum approval process. Members of the team included

students in the Department of Industrial and Engineering Technology (Technology

Information Systems tracks). Three of the student team members

are Six Sigma Green Belts. An MBA student who is a Six Sigma Black Belt at a local factory

The Six Sigma champion was the Associate Vice President for Academic


Management Information Systems were available as advisors as needed. This article provides an

niversity’s first Six Sigma improvement project. It also includes


ical and theoretical foundations of Six Sigma.

HISTORY AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATION OF SIX SIGMA

may be categorized as an organization-wide improvement initiative,

initiative that is focused on financial results, a statistically-based process improvement method,

and a statistical measure of process/product capability and variability. Incorporating elements


Six Sigma originated at Motorola in the 1980s in response to a CEO

failure levels tenfold in five years. Meeting this challenge required

swift and accurate responses from Motorola employees (Harry, 2000).

mith were engineers who worked together at Motorola, the

company at which Six Sigma was first used both as an organization-wide improvement initiative

and a statistical tool. According to Harry (http://www.isixsigma.com) and Harry and Schroeder

ll Smith was the originator of the Six Sigma concept in 1984. In addition to the

requirements for top management support and structured implementation, Six Sigma

rigorous application of statistical tools to increase profits, reduce costs, and improve quality and

It uses a structured systems approach to problem solving and strongly links initial


methodologies,


corporations. It has literally transformed them from a state of loss to

It can be used to improve any process . . . whether one used for tangible

While universities are not typically viewed as “profit and loss”


state that “. . . universities and . . . colleges in the

d States have been continuously striving for higher quality under the continuous pressure of

in private, state and federal funding” (p. 802). They

vity in institutions of higher

to support

and improvement of

nts also supports accreditation efforts.

is an accrediting agency for

is a Quality Enhancement

Commerce is the Process Team

The first student Six Sigma team

evaluated the course and curriculum approval process. Members of the team included four

(Technology

Three of the student team members

at a local factory

The Six Sigma champion was the Associate Vice President for Academic


eded. This article provides an

. It also includes


wide improvement initiative, a quality

s improvement method,

Incorporating elements


Motorola in the 1980s in response to a CEO-driven

failure levels tenfold in five years. Meeting this challenge required

mith were engineers who worked together at Motorola, the

wide improvement initiative

and Harry and Schroeder

concept in 1984. In addition to the

requirements for top management support and structured implementation, Six Sigma includes the

improve quality and

It uses a structured systems approach to problem solving and strongly links initial

improvement goal targets to bottom

2000).

As a statistical measurement, Six Sigma had its foundation in the work of Carl Frederick

Gauss whose pioneer work include

probability distribution which has a symmetric distribution about its mean

foundation that Shewhart (1931, 1939, 1980

Laboratories, introduced the use of the normal curve as the basis of statistical process control to

measure and explain process variability.

Shewhart as the Father of Statistical Quality Cont

Electric “was a breeding ground for many quality leaders including Joseph M. Juran, W.

Edwards Deming, and Walter A. Shewhart” (p. 39).

1920s and 1930s, there was Western Electric, its Hawthorne Works, and a committee puzzling

over how to use statistics to solve quality problems” (p. 73).

about the quality improvement efforts and notes

May 16, 1924” and that it was a “p chart

Dr. W. Edwards Deming (1986, 1993) wh

(quality) control and specifically the use of control charts to describe variability in processes.

However, Deming rightfully credited Shewhart with the development of theories of statistical

process control and their use in manufacturing organizations

As a statistical tool, Six S

Traditionally companies accepted three or four sigma performance levels as the

fact that these processes created between 6,200 and 67,000 problems per mi

The intent of Six Sigma is to improve customer satisfaction by reducing defects

performance target of Six Sigma

means an average of 3.4 defective parts per million

Although the goal is zero defects

levels of customer satisfaction as well as

While Six Sigma originally focused on product defects, the emphasis is currently on

service and process defects as well. In order to streamline processes, Six Sigma includ

of flowcharts, trend charts, cause and effect diagrams, Pareto charts, synchronous as opposed to

serial process steps, and many other statistical and non

SIX SIGMA IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Little (2003) emphasizes that “First Si

Then it addresses improving the capability of that process” (p. 106).

there are three key elements to achieving

employees. Customers define quality and expect

competitive prices, on-time delivery, service,

105). Jenicke, Kumar, and Holmes (2008) emphasize that customer definition is one o

challenges in the implementation of Six Sigma in an academic environment. They list other

challenges as the difficulty in measuring quality and analyzing data, the limitations of academic

reward systems, and the influence of uncontrollable factors o

even organizational success (Jenicke,

Jenicke, et al (2008) suggest

Sigma in an academic environment



improvement goal targets to bottom-line results (http://www.isixsigma.com; Harry & Schroeder,

s a statistical measurement, Six Sigma had its foundation in the work of Carl Frederick

Gauss whose pioneer work included Gaussian statistics based on the normal curve

has a symmetric distribution about its mean. It is from this

1931, 1939, 1980), a statistician who worked at Western Electric, Bell

introduced the use of the normal curve as the basis of statistical process control to

process variability. The American Society for Quality (2010)

Shewhart as the Father of Statistical Quality Control. Folaron (2003) indicated


s Deming, and Walter A. Shewhart” (p. 39). Juran (1997) suggests it is


over how to use statistics to solve quality problems” (p. 73). Juran (1997) offers specific details

about the quality improvement efforts and notes that “Shewhart invented the control chart on

May 16, 1924” and that it was a “p chart – a chart of percent defective (product)” (p. 79).

Dr. W. Edwards Deming (1986, 1993) who publicized the usefulness of statistical process



in manufacturing organizations, particularly at Western Electric

Sigma (6 σ) is used to measure the variability in process

Traditionally companies accepted three or four sigma performance levels as the norm, despite the

fact that these processes created between 6,200 and 67,000 problems per million opportunities.

improve customer satisfaction by reducing defects. The

gma is virtually defect-free processes and products since

defective parts per million or 99.99966% good quality.

zero defects, Six Sigma also drives organizations toward achieving higher

as well as reducing cycle time and operational costs.


service and process defects as well. In order to streamline processes, Six Sigma includ


serial process steps, and many other statistical and non-statistical tools.

SIX SIGMA IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Little (2003) emphasizes that “First Six Sigma focuses on reducing process variation.

Then it addresses improving the capability of that process” (p. 106). According to Little (2003),

there are three key elements to achieving (Six Sigma) quality: customers, processes and

define quality and expect – among other things – performance, reliability,

time delivery, service, and clear and correct transaction processes” (p.

Jenicke, Kumar, and Holmes (2008) emphasize that customer definition is one o



reward systems, and the influence of uncontrollable factors on student success, faculty success,

even organizational success (Jenicke, et al, 2008).

(2008) suggest that a framework is needed to successfully implement Six

Sigma in an academic environment. They propose such a framework in terms of implementation


methodologies,

; Harry & Schroeder,

s a statistical measurement, Six Sigma had its foundation in the work of Carl Frederick

the normal curve, a continuous

It is from this

, a statistician who worked at Western Electric, Bell

introduced the use of the normal curve as the basis of statistical process control to

2010) lists

indicated that Western


because “In the


offers specific details

that “Shewhart invented the control chart on

a chart of percent defective (product)” (p. 79). It was

o publicized the usefulness of statistical process



, particularly at Western Electric.

used to measure the variability in processes.

norm, despite the

llion opportunities.

. The ultimate

since Six Sigma

See Chart 1.

toward achieving higher

operational costs.


service and process defects as well. In order to streamline processes, Six Sigma includes the use


x Sigma focuses on reducing process variation.

According to Little (2003),

quality: customers, processes and

performance, reliability,

clear and correct transaction processes” (p.

Jenicke, Kumar, and Holmes (2008) emphasize that customer definition is one of the



n student success, faculty success,

that a framework is needed to successfully implement Six

hey propose such a framework in terms of implementation

level, Six Sigma methodology, and key performance indicators. They also provide examples of

strategic objectives and performance indicators by levels of implementation for the DMAIC

(Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) process.

framework is needed and offer Chart 2 as an indication of some of the elements that

in such a framework, particularly stakeholders, processes, and key performance indicators.

In spite of the challenges and difficulties of implementing Six Sigma in an academic

setting, the literature indicates that there are Six Sigma project successes in selected universities.

Various authors have written articles about Six Sigma in education

role of academia in Six Sigma education, including e

2004); Six Sigma in experiential learning (Box, 2006); a Six Sigma framework for academic

institutions (Jenicke, et al, 2008);

improving self service at university libraries (Kumi & Morrow, 2006);

Sigma concepts in management, statistics, and other classes (Weinstein, Castellano, Petrick &

Vokurka, 2008; and Zahn , 2003).

colleagues develop process thinking skills.

SIX SIGMA CASE BACKGROUND

Year 1. A junior faculty member at the University was charged with creating a new

graduate program, a Master of Science D

After much research and several meetings of the MIS faculty, courses

descriptions were created, and other paperwork

program were completed. However, the paperwork went nowhere.

Year 2. There was still a push underway for an MS/MIS degree. Course titles

descriptions were reviewed, faculty excitement was high, and paperwork was modified to reflect

changes.

Year 3. The idea of an MS/MIS program, though no longer on the front burner, was still

attracting attention. Someone mentioned in passing that the new course and new program process

had changed several years earlier from being a paper based process to being

process. The junior faculty member made several inquiries before finding out how to gain access

to the online system. The data was entered. The submit button was clicked.

nothing happened. The department chair ha

system requiring his approval. The notification had to be made

submitting changes or the department chair had to be extremely proactive in logging into and

monitoring the online system. Notification was made to the department chair. Approval was

received from the Associate Dean.

growing level of frustration among the MIS faculty. It seemed as if the process

changes to course descriptions or adding new courses to the course catalog was a closely guarded

secret. It was obvious that this was a

frustration and the desire to create a much needed d

for a Six Sigma project!

STUDENT TEAM SIX SIGMA PROJECT

The project followed the

and Control (DMAIC). See Figure 5.





Analyze, Improve, and Control) process. The authors agree that a

framework is needed and offer Chart 2 as an indication of some of the elements that




Various authors have written articles about Six Sigma in education from the perspectives of the

role of academia in Six Sigma education, including e-learning (Burns, 2005; Little, 2003; Mitra,


, 2008); using Six Sigma to design university housing (Johnson, 2006);

improving self service at university libraries (Kumi & Morrow, 2006); and the integration of Six


a, 2008; and Zahn , 2003). Zahn (2003) feels that professors need to help students and

colleagues develop process thinking skills.

SIX SIGMA CASE BACKGROUND

A junior faculty member at the University was charged with creating a new

program, a Master of Science Degree in Management Information Systems

After much research and several meetings of the MIS faculty, courses were identified, course

created, and other paperwork and forms related to the creation

However, the paperwork went nowhere.

. There was still a push underway for an MS/MIS degree. Course titles

, faculty excitement was high, and paperwork was modified to reflect

. The idea of an MS/MIS program, though no longer on the front burner, was still


had changed several years earlier from being a paper based process to being a partially


to the online system. The data was entered. The submit button was clicked. Weeks later . . . still

. The department chair had not been notified that there was anything in the new

system requiring his approval. The notification had to be made manually by the faculty member

or the department chair had to be extremely proactive in logging into and

Notification was made to the department chair. Approval was

received from the Associate Dean. Weeks later . . . still nothing happened – nothing

growing level of frustration among the MIS faculty. It seemed as if the process for making


It was obvious that this was a long drawn out business process that was broken.

frustration and the desire to create a much needed degree program was born the perfect candidate

STUDENT TEAM SIX SIGMA PROJECT

The project followed the five steps of Six Sigma – Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve,

See Figure 5. In Step one, the students worked with customers and


methodologies,



agree that a

framework is needed and offer Chart 2 as an indication of some of the elements that are needed




from the perspectives of the

learning (Burns, 2005; Little, 2003; Mitra,


ng Six Sigma to design university housing (Johnson, 2006);

and the integration of Six


Zahn (2003) feels that professors need to help students and

A junior faculty member at the University was charged with creating a new

egree in Management Information Systems (MS/MIS).

identified, course

related to the creation of a new

. There was still a push underway for an MS/MIS degree. Course titles and

, faculty excitement was high, and paperwork was modified to reflect

. The idea of an MS/MIS program, though no longer on the front burner, was still


partially online


Weeks later . . . still

d not been notified that there was anything in the new

manually by the faculty member

or the department chair had to be extremely proactive in logging into and

Notification was made to the department chair. Approval was

nothing that is, but a

for making


long drawn out business process that was broken. Out of

he perfect candidate

, Measure, Analyze, Improve,

In Step one, the students worked with customers and

stakeholders to define the problem, to determine what the customers and stakeholders needed,

and what the project goals should be. As a r

that Six Sigma tools and methodologies should be applied to the course and curriculum approval

processes where the following problems were identified

(1) Confusion existed among faculty members and others in terms of what the

processes were, what forms need to be c

were.

(2) Discrepancies (or perceived discrepancies) existed between processes

described in procedures and the actual processes that

submitting course and curriculum changes. Actual processes

as reality processes.

(3) There was potential to streamline the course and curriculum processes by

eliminating non-value

process steps instead of serial ones.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

As a part of stages one and two (Define and Measure),

goals of the Six Sigma project and fully expected their achievement: (1)

in process cycle time; (2) reduction in confusion and frustration of

curriculum changes; and (3) the elimination of discrepancies between the reality processes and

the procedural processes. To continue measurement and data analysis (Steps two and three),

students began to collect relevant proc

the internal customers and suppliers in the process (Pryor, Toombs, Cooke, & Humphreys,

2010). Their intent was to analyze cause

process problems existed and to use their data analysis to improve the process (Step 4). Finally,

the students proposed a new process (Step 4)

the new process, and the procedure was validated and

(Step 5) that the students made their final presentation to

university executive council, and the

and explained to them the necessity for teaching proc

tracking results over time. Students completed the following

Sigma project (See Figure 5):

� Reviewed the procedures for course and curriculum approval;

� Documented those procedu

� Interviewed process stakeholders

� Documented the reality processes through the use of flowcharts;

� Compared the reality processes wit




and what the project goals should be. As a result of the definition phase, the students determined

Sigma tools and methodologies should be applied to the course and curriculum approval

where the following problems were identified:

Confusion existed among faculty members and others in terms of what the

, what forms need to be completed, and who the contact people

Discrepancies (or perceived discrepancies) existed between processes

described in procedures and the actual processes that were used by those

submitting course and curriculum changes. Actual processes were refer

There was potential to streamline the course and curriculum processes by

value-added steps and/or utilizing parallel (i.e., simultaneous)

process steps instead of serial ones.

As a part of stages one and two (Define and Measure), the students listed the following as

goals of the Six Sigma project and fully expected their achievement: (1) a significant r

reduction in confusion and frustration of people submitting course and

the elimination of discrepancies between the reality processes and

To continue measurement and data analysis (Steps two and three),

students began to collect relevant process data from procedures and process stakeholders


intent was to analyze cause-and-effect relationships in order to understand why

existed and to use their data analysis to improve the process (Step 4). Finally,

the students proposed a new process (Step 4). In (Step 5) a procedure was written documenting

, and the procedure was validated and published. It was in the control phase

made their final presentation to the executive leadership team, the

university executive council, and the associate vice president who was the Six Sigma champion

and explained to them the necessity for teaching process stakeholders the new process and for

Students completed the following activities in Steps 2

Reviewed the procedures for course and curriculum approval;

Documented those procedures through the use of flowcharts;

process stakeholders to determine reality processes;

Documented the reality processes through the use of flowcharts;

Compared the reality processes with the procedural processes;


methodologies,


the students determined

Sigma tools and methodologies should be applied to the course and curriculum approval

Confusion existed among faculty members and others in terms of what the

ompleted, and who the contact people

Discrepancies (or perceived discrepancies) existed between processes

used by those

referred to

There was potential to streamline the course and curriculum processes by

added steps and/or utilizing parallel (i.e., simultaneous)

he students listed the following as

a significant reduction

people submitting course and

the elimination of discrepancies between the reality processes and

To continue measurement and data analysis (Steps two and three),

process stakeholders (i.e.,


effect relationships in order to understand why

existed and to use their data analysis to improve the process (Step 4). Finally,

a procedure was written documenting

control phase

the executive leadership team, the

associate vice president who was the Six Sigma champion

ess stakeholders the new process and for

Steps 2 – 5 of the Six

� Analyzed process steps

� Created a proposed course and curriculum approval process

� Created a flowchart documenting the

� Reviewed and refined

� Briefed process stakeholders including the

Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs), the

presidents, the University Executive Council,

representatives of the College of Arts and Sciences, College of Business

Technology, and College of Education;

� Used feedback from stakeholder briefings

� Reviewed and validated the

and curriculum approval process

� Published the new procedure.

The procedural flowchart

approval process and the revised flowchart for the streamlined course and curriculum approval

process are in Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4

process stakeholders. The streamlined process reduced cycle time by 7

was revised and validated to reflect the new process.

new process.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Time for collecting data is an issue in an academic environment because the course and

curriculum approval process usually occurs only once a year. Inputs to the process were

categorized as controllable or uncontrollable

influenced. The length of time required

universities since you have to deal with the startup and phase down times associated

semesters (Kukreja, Ricks, Myer 2009).

Six Sigma at universities are: (1)

Sigma as an organization-wide, structured, top down

universities for a Six Sigma initiative to be owned at the executive leadership team level

thereby given the required priority

scarce and do not necessarily include support for improvement initiatives. (3). Six Sigma

requires specific knowledge in terms of theories and tools and the application of those theories

and tools. It is difficult in terms of money and time to involve faculty members, staff and

administrators in Six Sigma training and projects

black belts, and master black belts. (4). Key performance indicators must be utilized. University



Analyzed process steps to determine ways to streamline the processes;

course and curriculum approval process;

a flowchart documenting the proposed process;

d the proposed process;

Briefed process stakeholders including the Six Sigma champion (i.e., the

Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs), the President and his vice

presidents, the University Executive Council, and the deans and curriculum

representatives of the College of Arts and Sciences, College of Business

, and College of Education;

Used feedback from stakeholder briefings to improve proposed new process;

Reviewed and validated the proposed procedure for the streamlined course

and curriculum approval process; and

Published the new procedure.

rocedural flowchart and reality flowchart for the original course and curriculum

process and the revised flowchart for the streamlined course and curriculum approval

Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4. The proposed process and flowchart were approved by

process stakeholders. The streamlined process reduced cycle time by 78.9%. The procedure

was revised and validated to reflect the new process. Technology was identified to support

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

me for collecting data is an issue in an academic environment because the course and


categorized as controllable or uncontrollable as well as whether they were capable of being

required to complete Six Sigma projects is a problem at

universities since you have to deal with the startup and phase down times associated

semesters (Kukreja, Ricks, Myer 2009). Other problems associated with the implementation of

(1). It is difficult to create a compelling reason to implement Six

structured, top down approach. As a result, it is difficult in

initiative to be owned at the executive leadership team level

thereby given the required priority. (2). Resources to support educational initiatives are often


quires specific knowledge in terms of theories and tools and the application of those theories


administrators in Six Sigma training and projects in order for some of them become green belts,



methodologies,

ays to streamline the processes;

Six Sigma champion (i.e., the

President and his vice

deans and curriculum

representatives of the College of Arts and Sciences, College of Business and

to improve proposed new process;

procedure for the streamlined course

course and curriculum

process and the revised flowchart for the streamlined course and curriculum approval

ere approved by

The procedure

Technology was identified to support the

me for collecting data is an issue in an academic environment because the course and


capable of being

Six Sigma projects is a problem at

universities since you have to deal with the startup and phase down times associated with

implementation of

It is difficult to create a compelling reason to implement Six

As a result, it is difficult in

initiative to be owned at the executive leadership team level and

educational initiatives are often


quires specific knowledge in terms of theories and tools and the application of those theories


become green belts,


personnel are accustomed to measurements required by accrediting agencies, legislatures, boards

of education, boards of trustees, etc. These

needed to significantly improve processes. (5).

difficult and time consuming to get them implemented because they often require additio

computer support (e.g., online applications and approvals, including eSignatures). So,

problem involves more than process changes and the potential negat

It also involves the time and money that are required to implemen

Procedures often must be updated to document process changes

what the new process entails. At this stage, i

implemented. (7). Recognition and rewards for im

impacting the extent to which stakeholders are eager to be involved in improvement initiatives.

To be successful in universities and colleges, Six Sigma and other improvement

initiatives should be aligned with element

(e.g., accreditation efforts and/or institutional effectiveness departments which are responsible

for data analyses and report submissions).

and national quality initiatives, including

Finally, students should be involved in Six Sigma and other excellence initiatives. After all,

students are the ultimate stakeholders. They are customers, in

co-managers of the teaching/learning process, and final products as they graduate and seek

employment.

REFERENCES

American Society for Quality (ASQ). Retrieved October 26, 201

asq/who-we-are/bio_shewhart.html

Ask Dr. Mikel Harry – FAQs about Six Sigma (2011

http://www.isixsigma.com/

Bandyopadhyay, J.K. and Lichtman, R. (2007, December).

productivity improvement in an institution for higher education in the United States,

International Journal of Management,

Box, T.M. (2006). Six Sigma quality: Experiential learning,

Journal, 71(1): 20-23.

Burns, T. (2005). E-learning: The future of quality training,

Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the Crisis

Advanced Engineering Study

Deming, W.E. (1993). The New Economics,

Advanced Engineering Study.

Drake, D., Sutterfield, J.S., and Ngassam, C. (2008). The revolution of Six Sigma: An analysis of

its theory and application,

11(1):29-44.

Folaron, J. (2003). The evolution of Six Sigma,

Harry, M. J., (2000). Six Sigma Leads Enterprises to Coordinate Efforts.

Progress, 33(3): 70-72.

Harry, M. and Schroeder, R. (2000).

Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations,




, etc. These measurements are not necessarily the metrics that a

needed to significantly improve processes. (5). Once resolutions for problems are identified, it is

difficult and time consuming to get them implemented because they often require additio

computer support (e.g., online applications and approvals, including eSignatures). So,

process changes and the potential negative reactions against them.

the time and money that are required to implement even simple changes. (6).

Procedures often must be updated to document process changes; and stakeholders must learn

what the new process entails. At this stage, improvements can be stalled or even never

implemented. (7). Recognition and rewards for improvement are limited, thus negatively

the extent to which stakeholders are eager to be involved in improvement initiatives.


gned with elements that are an integral part of their respective systems


lyses and report submissions). Also, university leaders should be involved in state

ational quality initiatives, including applications for various quality/excellence awards.


students are the ultimate stakeholders. They are customers, in-process material as they learn,

managers of the teaching/learning process, and final products as they graduate and seek

American Society for Quality (ASQ). Retrieved October 26, 2011 from http://asq.org/about

are/bio_shewhart.html.

FAQs about Six Sigma (2011). Retrieved October 26, 2011

http://www.isixsigma.com/.

Bandyopadhyay, J.K. and Lichtman, R. (2007, December). Six Sigma approach to quality and


International Journal of Management, 24(4): 802-824.

Box, T.M. (2006). Six Sigma quality: Experiential learning, S.A.M. Advanced Manage

learning: The future of quality training, Quality Progress, 38(2):

Out of the Crisis, 2nd

ed., Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Center for

Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

The New Economics, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Center for

Advanced Engineering Study.


its theory and application, Academy of Information and Management Sciences Journal,

Folaron, J. (2003). The evolution of Six Sigma, Six Sigma Forum Magazine, 2(4):

Harry, M. J., (2000). Six Sigma Leads Enterprises to Coordinate Efforts. Quality

Harry, M. and Schroeder, R. (2000). Six Sigma—The Breakthrough Management Strategy

Revolutionizing the World’s Top Corporations, Doubleday.


methodologies,


are not necessarily the metrics that are

Once resolutions for problems are identified, it is

difficult and time consuming to get them implemented because they often require additional

computer support (e.g., online applications and approvals, including eSignatures). So, the

ive reactions against them.

t even simple changes. (6).

; and stakeholders must learn

mprovements can be stalled or even never

negatively

the extent to which stakeholders are eager to be involved in improvement initiatives.


that are an integral part of their respective systems


niversity leaders should be involved in state

applications for various quality/excellence awards.


ess material as they learn,

managers of the teaching/learning process, and final products as they graduate and seek

http://asq.org/about-

, 2011 from

Six Sigma approach to quality and


S.A.M. Advanced Management

38(2): 50-56.

MIT Center for

MIT Center for


Information and Management Sciences Journal,

2(4): 38-44.

Quality

The Breakthrough Management Strategy

Jenicke, L.O., Kumar, A., and Holmes, M.C. (2008). A framework for applying six sigma

improvement methodology in an

462. Retrieved October 1, 201

Johnson, J A. (2006). Designing new housing at the University of Miami: A

dmadv/dfss case study. Quality engineering, 18(3):

Juran, J.M. (1997). Early SQC: A historical supplement,

Jenicke, L.O., Kumar, A., and Holmes, M.C. (2008).

improvement methodology in an academic environment,

462. Retrieved October 1

Kukreja, A., Ricks, J.M., and Meyer, J.A. (2009

improvement in business curriculum: A case study,

25.

Kumi, S. and Morrow, J. (2006).

University Library, Electronic Library and Information Systems

Retrieved October 1, 201

Little, B. (2003). Six Sigma Techniques Improve the Quality of E

Commercial Training, 35(3):

Mitra, A. (2004). Six Sigma educations

293-302.

Pryor, M.G., Hendrix, M., Alexander, C.

Implementation of Strategic Quality Management (SQM

Education Research, 5(2): 1

Pryor, M.G., Toombs, L.A., Cooke, J., and Humphreys, J.H. (20

management: the role of process ownership, management, and improvement,

International Journal of Business Excellence

Shewhart, W. A. (1939). Statistical Methods from the Viewpoint of Quality Contro

Graduate School, Department of Agriculture.

Shewhart, W.A. (1931, 1980). Economic Control of Quality Manufactured Product

Nostrand, (reprinted , American Society for Quality Control, 1980).

Weinstein, L.B., Castellano, J., Petrick,

Concepts in an MBA Quality Management Class,

March/April, 2008: 233-238.

Zahn, D. (2003). What influence is the Six Sigma movement having in universities? What

influence should it be having?

October 21, 2011 from ABI/INFORM Global.




improvement methodology in an academic environment, The TQM Journal,

462. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from www.emeraldinsight.com/1754-2731.htm

Johnson, J A. (2006). Designing new housing at the University of Miami: A "six sigma"

udy. Quality engineering, 18(3): 299.

Juran, J.M. (1997). Early SQC: A historical supplement, Quality Progress, 30(9)


improvement methodology in an academic environment, The TQM Journal,

462. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from www.emeraldinsight.com/1754-2731.htm

, A., Ricks, J.M., and Meyer, J.A. (2009, February). Using Six Sigma for performance

improvement in business curriculum: A case study, Performance Improvement,

Kumi, S. and Morrow, J. (2006). Improving self service the six sigma way at Newcastle

Electronic Library and Information Systems 40 (2), 123

1, 2011 from www.emeraldinsight.com/0033-0337.htm

Little, B. (2003). Six Sigma Techniques Improve the Quality of E-Learning, Industrial and

35(3): 104-108.

educations: A critical role for academia, The TQM Magazine,

Hendrix, M., Alexander, C. and Collins, B. (2010). World Class University

Implementation of Strategic Quality Management (SQM), International Journal of

, 5(2): 1-19.

Pryor, M.G., Toombs, L.A., Cooke, J., and Humphreys, J.H. (2011). Strategic quality


International Journal of Business Excellence, 4(4): 420-439.

Statistical Methods from the Viewpoint of Quality Contro

ate School, Department of Agriculture.

Economic Control of Quality Manufactured Product

Nostrand, (reprinted , American Society for Quality Control, 1980).

Petrick, J. & Vokurka, R. J. (2008). Integrating Six Sigma

Concepts in an MBA Quality Management Class, Journal of Education for Business,

238.


influence should it be having? Six Sigma Forum Magazine, 3(1): 33-34.

ABI/INFORM Global.


methodologies,


The TQM Journal, 20(5), 453-

2731.htm.

"six sigma"

30(9): 73-81.

A framework for applying six sigma

The TQM Journal, 20(5): 453-

2731.htm.

. Using Six Sigma for performance

Performance Improvement, 48(2): 9-

Improving self service the six sigma way at Newcastle

40 (2), 123-36.

htm.

Industrial and

The TQM Magazine, 16(4):

(2010). World Class University tm

- The

), International Journal of

). Strategic quality


Statistical Methods from the Viewpoint of Quality Control, Washington:

Economic Control of Quality Manufactured Product, Van

). Integrating Six Sigma

Journal of Education for Business,


Retrieved

APPENDIX

Chart 1: Defects per Million Opportunities at Various Sigma Levels

Sigma Level

One Sigma

Two Sigma

Three Sigma

Four Sigma

Five Sigma

Six Sigma



Chart 1: Defects per Million Opportunities at Various Sigma Levels

Defects per Million Opportunities

690,000

308,000

66,800

6,210

230

3.4


methodologies,

Defects per Million Opportunities

Chart 2: Selected Key Stakeholders, Processes, and Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s)

Institutional Levels

Key

Stakeholders

University/Institution

level

And

College/School Level

Alumni

Employer

Students

Faculty

Administrators

Board of Trustees

Board of

Education

Legislature

(Public

institutions)

Departmental Level Alumni

Employer

Students

Faculty

Administrators

Source: Adapted from Jenicke, L.O., Kumar, A., and Holmes, M.C. (2008). A framework for

applying six sigma improvement methodology in an aca

Journal, 20(5): 459.




Stakeholders

Selected Processes

Key Performance

(KPI’s)

Employer

Administrators

Board of Trustees

Education

Legislature

institutions)

Alumni donation

process

Student placement

process

Student recruitment

and retention processes

Faculty hiring process

Faculty tenure &

promotion process

Financial/Budgetary

process

Alumni satisfaction

# of alumni making donations

Total of alumni contributions

# of employers

Career Day

Level of employer satisfaction

with students they hire

# of job offers pending graduation

# of students recruited

% of students retained

Student satisfaction

# of qualified applications per job

Length of (cycle time) of hiring

process

% approved for tenure on initial

application

% denied tenure

% of employees who understand

financial/budgetary process

% reduction in budget required by

stakeholders

Employer

Administrators

Course development

process

Curriculum

development process

Research & publication

process

Financial/Budgetary

justification process

Cycle time to develop courses

and get them approved

Cycle time to develop curricula


Employer satisfactio

student readiness

Productivity (# of scholarly

articles per faculty member)

% increase/decrease in budget


applying six sigma improvement methodology in an academic environment,


methodologies,


Key Performance Indicators

Alumni satisfaction

# of alumni making donations

Total of alumni contributions

# of employers recruiting on

Level of employer satisfaction

with students they hire

# of job offers pending graduation

# of students recruited

% of students retained

Student satisfaction

# of qualified applications per job

Length of (cycle time) of hiring

% approved for tenure on initial

% denied tenure

% of employees who understand

financial/budgetary process

% reduction in budget required by

Cycle time to develop courses


Cycle time to develop curricula


Employer satisfaction with

student readiness

Productivity (# of scholarly

articles per faculty member)

% increase/decrease in budget


demic environment, The TQM

Figure 1: Procedural Flowchart (Process Cycle Time = 19 Weeks)

FACULTY

DEPARTMENTAPPROVAL

COLLEGEEXECUTIVECOUNCIL

PROVOSTOFFICE

COUNCIL ONTEACHER

EDUCATION(January)

FACULTYSENATE

(February)

DEAN’S COUNCIL

ACADEMICVICE PRESIDENT

PRESIDENT

PROVOST OFFICE

TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY

SYSTEMS STAFF

TAMUS BOARD OF REGENTS

THECB & SACS

CATALOG



Figure 1: Procedural Flowchart (Process Cycle Time = 19 Weeks)

GRADUATECOUNCIL(March)


methodologies,

Figure 2: Reality Flowchart – Variable Cycle Time

START OF CURRICULUM CHANGE PROCESS(FALL – 1 YEAR PRIOR TO

CHANGE EFFECTIVE DATE)

LOG INTO CURRICULUM INVENTORY WEB SITE

CHECK WHETHER COURSES ARE IN THE

CURRICULUM INVENTORY

ADD COURSES TO CURRICULUM INVENTORY USING

APPROPRIATE DOCUMENT

CHANGING COURSES IN CURRICULUM INVENTORY USING

APPROPRIATE DOCUMENT

APPROVALS FROM DEPARTMENT HEAD,

ASSOCIATE DEAN OR DEANGRADUATE SCHOOL

(DEADLINE NOVEMBER)

APPROVAL FROM GRADUATE COUNCIL(DEADLINE MARCH)

APPROVAL FROM DEAN’S COUNCIL

CURRICULUM UPDATES ENTERED INTO CATALOG

END OF CURRICULUM CHANGE PROCESS



Variable Cycle Time – 19 Weeks or More

START OF CURRICULUM CHANGE PROCESS

LOG INTO CURRICULUM INVENTORY WEB SITE

TO CURRICULUM INVENTORY USING

IN CURRICULUM INVENTORY USING

CURRICULUM UPDATES ENTERED INTO


methodologies,

Figure 3: Recommended Flow Chart



: Recommended Flow Chart


methodologies,

Figure 4: Six Sigma DMAIC Steps for Course and Curriculum Process Improvement

Who: Student Team,

Customers, Stakeholders

What: Document &

implement proposed process

Who: Student Team,


What: Review & refine

proposed process; Validate

proposed process


The application of Six Sigma methodologies

: Six Sigma DMAIC Steps for Course and Curriculum Process Improvement

Who: Student Team,


What: Define problem;

determine needs; identify goals

Who: Student Team,


What: Review & document

current procedures; Review

& document current

process

Who: Student Team

What: Analyze current

procedure & process; Identify

improvement opportunities;

Create proposed process

proposed process; Validate


The application of Six Sigma methodologies

: Six Sigma DMAIC Steps for Course and Curriculum Process Improvement

: Student Team,


: Review & document

current procedures; Review

& document current

: Analyze current

procedure & process; Identify

improvement opportunities;

Create proposed process

the application of six sigma methodologies to university ...aabri.com/manuscripts/111045.pdfare six...

Documents