CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS

Whereas the manufacturing criteria for success are more concrete and definite, the fact of the matter is that services also have criteria for success. A typical comparison is found in Table 17.1.

Table 17.1: A Comparison of Manufacturing and Service Success Criteria

Manufacturing	Service
Safety	Safety
Quality	Quality
Delivery	Delivery
Cost	Cost
Morale	Morale
Transformation Tangibles Concrete (objective)

It seems that the only difference between the two types of criteria is indeed the energy transformation to change something into a product. But that is not all. Although the words seem to be the same, the connotation and the outcomes of these words are quite different. For example, in manufacturing, we focus on the product as being tangible , solid, measurable, and objective. On the other hand, in service we deal with intangibles that are ethereal and emotionally or perceptually based (eye of the beholder). In addition, the characteristics of quality are also quite different. Let us examine some in Table 17.2.

Table 17.2: A Comparison of Quality Characteristics

Manufacturing	Service
Safety:	Safety
Lost time	Quality
Severity rate	Delivery
Fatalities	Cost
Quality:	Morale
Things gone wrong	Intangibles
% units and zero defects	Subjective
Campaigns	Treatment of customer
Delivery: Build per day % parts on pull	Perhaps some service organizations have some things in common with the manufacturing characteristics
Changes	The important issue is that service is very fluid indeed and has to worry about maximizing things such as the following:
Supplier release stability	The right product
Cost:	The right time
Year to year	The right quality
Issue to issue (part)	The right place
Budget	The right value
Inventory	The right information
Morale:	The right service
Total% of work teams	EVERY TIME
% of team leaders in place	WHY?
Effective work teams	So that the products are targeted right
Total work teams	So that constraints are eliminated
Transformation:	So that disciplined behaviors are learned
Facility efficiency rating(s)	So that treatment of the customer is a positive experience (Bowman 2001)
	So that customer loyalty may continue

For that maximization to occur, metrics must be developed. Once they have been, then controlling and monitoring become very important issues for the entire organization. What kind of planning is required for such development? We believe that everyone in the organization has definite responsibilities to carry on this improvement initiative. The following are examples:

• Executives and directors define metrics that deal with customer satisfaction. Those metrics, however, must be robust to facilitate improvement effectively. That means that factors and noises must be characterized on this level and then cascaded to the lower levels. In essence, this level of management defines the Y ( X ) = F ( x, n ), where Y ( X ) are the customer needs, wants, and expectations; x are measurable requirements that correlate to the Y ( X ); and n is the noise that despite which these requirements must be effective. The reader should note that the traditional six sigma focuses only on Y ( X ) = F ( X ), which is an appraisal approach. When we talk about Y ( X ) = F ( x, n ), we refer to planning a system that is free of problems and responsive to customer needs, wants, and expectations. There is a big difference between the two approaches. More about this in Volume VI.

• Operating management defines, develops, and executes metrics that deal with the right procedures, right time, and right experience.

• Analysts deal with metrics on the root cause level in such a way that the cost impact of poor performance is identified; then they make sure that this information is accurate and available to higher management.