It is a pleasure for me to present today the first Guest Blog Post by Christian Paulsen. He is a Senior Lean Six Sigma Consultant who helps companies optimize performance and adds value to organizations by driving continuous process improvements and bottom line cost savings. Christian brings over 20 years of manufacturing leadership experience and Lean Manufacturing expertise in the food and beverage industry. He authors Lean Leadership and is a regular contributor to the Consumer Goods blog.

I am walking the production floor (going to the Gemba) to check out a few things for myself with a new client. Going to the Gemba is a great tool for any leader because you will learn things about your operation that you can’t learn from your office or the conference room. 


The purpose of today’s Gemba walk is to look for waste on one of the packaging lines. It becomes apparent that there is quite a bit of waste at the filler itself because the weight control is not good. Lousy weight control in food plants results in giving away more product than you should (the difference between the actual weight of a product and the declared weight on the label is give-away). I look at the jar-to-jar variation then naturally turn to the Statistical Process Control (SPC) charts. It’s quite clear that the average weight of the jars is well above the declared weight. The filler needs to be adjusted to reduce the weights. The Filler Operator approaches and tells me that she knows that she should turn the filler down but machine is not capable of running any lower weights. 


To get a better understanding of how a filler machine works, here is a video showing a Pacific Filler that is filling jars with mayonnaise. Pacific Fillers and similar equipment are fairly common in the food and beverage industry.


This reminds me of another Gemba walk with another client. The SPC charts clearly show that the weights on this filler need to be adjusted too. I ask the operator if she is familiar with the SPC rules. She does not know what I am talking about even though they are printed on the control chart that she is filling out every 15 minutes. She let’s me know that she has been here for almost a year and “knows when to make adjustments.”

These real events illustrate two issues that are all too common in today’s manufacturing plants and other work sites.

  • Team members don’t have the tools they need to perform their job well: The first operator knows that every jar she produces has waste because it is needlessly over-weight. Yet she is unable to do anything about it. What is the point of using SPC if you cannot do anything with the information? 
  • Team members don’t have the knowledge to do their job well: The second operator thinks that her experience is enough to know when to make adjustments. Yet we know that strictly following the SPC rules is the best way to keep a process in statistical control and to optimize the weights at your filler. What is the point of using SPC if you don’t know what to do with the information? 

The bottom line is that Lean Leaders don’t implement systems like Statistical Process Control unless their team has the knowledge and tools required to use them properly. SPC is a great tool that is under-utilized. Many food plants use it for weight control but it could be used to help control many key metrics. 

Can you share an example of how SPC is used at your site?


Read the follow-up post of this post/Part 2 here.

I recommend you to check out Christian Paulsen blog, you’ll find more than interesting posts. Thanks Chris!

Categories: Guest PostSPC

19 Comments

christianpaulsen62 · July 17, 2012 at 11:17 pm

JImena-thank you for allowing the pleasure to guest blog here.

Jimena Calfa · July 20, 2012 at 9:00 pm

Scott Smith from the ASQ community:

The second example ("knows when to make adjustments" can lead to tampering. Tampering is when you make adjustments for common cause variation (noise in the system). These unnecessary adjustments can actually lead an in-control process to go out of control.

christianpaulsen62 · July 23, 2012 at 7:07 am

Scott – yes, you raise a great point. Unnecessary adjustments will always at the very least increase variability and can easily take a process out-of-control. Following the standard SPC rules for making adjustments will minimize these risks.

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:11 am

Lori Gotta from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

I agree with Christian that if the operators do not understand how to make adjustments and if a machine is not capable of staying within specifications, SPC is useless. SPC is a useful tool when operators can monitor a process and make adjustments to stay within specifications to avoid running defective or in Christian's example adding too much product (waste).
We can monitor processes with SPC but if nothing is done with the information SPC becomes part of the waste.

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:12 am

Stephen Beukelman from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

First, training operators on use of SPC is one of the basic steps to implement. If that is not done then the management team has failed, and is likely failing in other areas. Second, SPC has nothhing to do with specifications. It applies only to capability. If the equipment is not capable of meeting specifications then again, the managment team has failed. These issues are bare minimum basics. A management team that does not address the basics cannot expect to be successful at any level. A six sigma consultant should not be needed to address these issues.

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:12 am

Lori Gotta from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

I agree with the training side of SPC and the machine should be capable. But SPC shows the operator if a process is within specification or not and where adjustments need to be made. Too often management fails to utilize processes as they are intended.

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:13 am

John LaMascus from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

When ASQ members discuss these kinds of topics, we reveal our bias that everyone should be sharing our sensiblities and values. The unfortunate truth is Management probably doesn't invest in training the operators (they just leave), recoils in horror at the the thought of operators making adjustments and keeps records to prevent lawsuits or comply with an external rule they have discovered is more expensive if they don't comply with it. You may think "What a cynical viewpoint!", but the Management may truly feel "Quality is for suckers…" and have some experience that supports that conclusion. Management failure indeed! Our challenge is to give them a "better point" than "because you should, because I said so". We need to articulate a compelling arguement. In my experience, they will listen if we start with "I know how you can make even more money…"

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:14 am

Alberto Molinar from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

The whole point of SPC is to UNDERSTAND VARIATION or if you prefer to understand how the processes behave… Is a new way of thinking with some tools attached (I think this was Dr. Wheeler)

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:15 am

Stephen Beukelman from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

Yes Alberto. And Lori, adjustments made to a process based upon SPC using specification limits will result in increased variation. This is because the specification limits are not the same as control limits based upon random variation in the process. An out of control signal against a specification limit is likely not due to a change in process variation and so any adjustment made will shift the mean and increase overall process variation. Better no SPC than incorrect SPC.

Jimena Calfa · July 27, 2012 at 7:15 am

Tim Higgins from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

Consider thiis from The New Economics "The most important application of the principles of statistical control of quality, by which I mean knowledge about common causes and special causes, is in the management of people."

I infer from the statement that MANAGEMENT needs the knowledge and tools if they are to engage in "the most important application" of SPC. Thus on-the-floor knowledge and tools are insufficient for operating the company effectively.

Elsewhere he claims that these practices have been adopted by about 3% of what the organization does – ". . . has been applied mostly on the shop floor. Everyone knows about the statistical control of quality. This is important, but the shop floor is only a small part of the total. Anyone could be 100 per cent successful with the 3 per cent, and find himself out of business."

christianpaulsen62 · July 27, 2012 at 9:33 pm

Lori-I couldn't agree more. Thanks for your insight.

christianpaulsen62 · July 27, 2012 at 9:42 pm

Stephen-you raise very valid points and I think we agree. The issues discussed are all about failed leadership.

To Lori's point, most companies I've seen use SPC to stay as close to the desired target and specification as possible. This works well when used properly and the process is capable of meeting the spec. I have seen where the specifications are set too tight which results in out of spec product even when the process is in statistical control. That creates a mess until the process is improved or the specifications are adjusted.

Thanks for your comments, Stephen & Lori.

christianpaulsen62 · July 27, 2012 at 9:44 pm

Alberto-Dr. Wheeler has some great work in this area. Understanding variation is what SPC is all about in it's purest sense. To take it a step further, it helps us understand when we should react and when we are dealing with normal variation.

christianpaulsen62 · July 30, 2012 at 9:31 pm

Tim-excellent points. SPC is under utilized as a tool and could be used with many of the Key Performance Indicators of most organizations. Proper use of control charts would help managers understand when and how to react to the data.

Jimena Calfa · August 1, 2012 at 12:17 am

Craig Plain from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

Great blog. Thanks for sharing. SPC, like any tool, can be useful, or not…all depends on knowledge of tool and ability to use it.

christianpaulsen62 · August 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm

Craig-I appreciate your comments.

Brad Erikson · September 15, 2012 at 1:12 am

I agree with both you and Lori about the usefulness of SPC and preventing product waste. Great article, Christian.

lean management · December 6, 2012 at 7:28 pm

Lean reduces waste. Lean creates more efficient operations. Lean improves flow. Lean creates an improvement culture. Lean is about respect for people. Lean is a tower in Italy. Lean identifies value. Lean makes problems visible.

Jimena Calfa · April 4, 2013 at 11:21 pm

Daniel Zrymiak from ASQ – The American Society for Quality LinkedIn group:

"To those who would criticize the applicability of SPC, I pose two questions. First, has the appropriate chart been selected based on whether attributes or variables are being measured? Second, have the special causes been removed prior to plotting the data? If these questions create confusion and uncertainty, then the SPC is not being correctly applied."

Comments are closed.

Show
Hide
Subscribe to On Quality!
Get the latest content first.
We respect your privacy.