Chapter 1

Differing
Perspectives on
Quality

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1-1
 Differing Perspectives on Quality
Chapter 1

 What is Quality?
 Differing Functional Perspectives on
Quality
 The Three Spheres of Quality

 Other Perspectives on Quality

 Arriving at a Common Perspective

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1-2
  What is quality???

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1-3
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1-4
 5 Approaches to Defining Quality – Garvin
 The Transcendent Approach: a quality cannot be
defined precisely, we learn to recognize it only through
experience
 Innate excellence

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 5 Approaches to Defining Quality –
Garvin
 The Product-based Approach: quality is
precise and measurable variable, products
can be ranked – quality products have more
attributes (computer with more memory)

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 5 Approaches to Defining Quality - Garvin
 The Manufacturing-based Approach : products or
services meet stated requirements,
 Manufacturing and engineering practise - Quality is
measured by the manufacturer’s ability to target the
requirements consistently with little variability

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 5 Approaches to Defining Quality -
Garvin 4
 The User-based Approach : quality of a
product is determined by the
consumer. There are widely varying
individual preferences.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 5 Approaches to Defining Quality -
Garvin 5
 The Value-based
Approach : quality
is defined in costs
and prices. How
much is the
benefit of the good
or service
outweigh the
cost?
 Did the costumer
get his or her
money’s worth?
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 What is Quality?
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

 Performance  Durability
 Features  Serviceability
 Reliability  Aesthetics
 Conformance Perceived
Quality

©
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 10
 What is Quality?
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

Performance Efficiency with

Feature which a product
Reliability achieves its
Conformance
intended
purpose.
(

Eg (fuel
efficiency of
automobile, the
acoustic pair of
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
stereo 1 - 11
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

Performance  Attributes
Features that supplement
Reliability the product’s
Conformance
basic
performance
(multiple
features in
smart Phone, 3D
UHD TV is more
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
expensive 1 - 12
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

Performance Product’s

Features propensity to
Reliability perform
Conformance
consistently
over the
product’s useful
life.
It is based on
uct is considered reliable if the chance that it will fail during its de
the probability
very low. For example, if a refrigerator has a 2% chance of failure i
life of 10 years, we say that it is 98% reliable.
theory of 1 - 13
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

Performance Adherence to
Features quantifiable
Reliability specifications
Conformance
a product is designed, certain numeric dimensions for the product’s perfo
tablished, such as capacity, speed, size, durability, or the like. These nume
ct dimensions are referred to as specifications.

articular dimension of a product is within the allowable range of tolerance

fication, it conforms.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 14
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

 Ability to Durability
tolerate stress  Serviceability
or trauma  Aesthetics
without failing
Perceived 
n example of a product that is not veryQuality
durable is a lightbulb. Lightbulbs ca
damaged easily and cannot be repaired. In contrast, a trash can is a very
rable product that can be subjected to much wear and tear.

ample : water proof watch. Metal desigh smart phone.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 15
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

 The ease and Durability

low cost of  Serviceability
repair for a  Aesthetics
product
Perceived 
Quality
g of UPS systems (standalone vs hot swappable

Note that different dimensions of quality are not

mutually exclusive.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 16
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

 Degree to Durability
which product  Serviceability
attributes are  Aesthetics
matched to  Perceived
consumer
Quality
preferences
how a product looks,
feels, sounds, tastes,
or smells

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 17
 What is Quality
Garvin’s Product Quality Dimensions

Quality as the Durability


customer  Serviceability
perceives it…  Aesthetics
image,  Perceived
recognition,
tomers imbue products and Quality with their understa
services
word of mouth.
heir goodness.
factors such as brand image, brand recognition, amount of
advertising, and word of mouth can affect consumers’
perceptions of quality.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 18
 Quality in services
Service quality is even more difficult to
define than product quality. Although
services and production share many
attributes, services have more diverse
quality attributes than products. This
often results from wide variation
created by high customer involvement.
For example, the consumer of a fountain
pen probably will not care that the
factory worker producing the pen was in
a foul mood (as long as the quality of the
pen is good). However, excellent food 1 - 19
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

Parasuraman, Zeithamel, and Berry

(PZ&B), three marketing professors from
Texas A&M University, published a widely
recognized set of service quality
dimensions. These dimensions have been
used in many service firms to measure
 Tangibles
quality performance.
 Service
Reliability

Responsiveness
1 - 20

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

 Tangibles Physical

Service appearance of
Reliability the facility,
 equipment,
Responsiveness personnel and
 Assurance
communications
Eg: Hotel Ambiance,
materials
 Empathy

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 21
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

Tangibles ability of The

 Service the service

Reliability provider to
 perform the
Responsiveness promised
service
Eg: food panda (delivery on time
 Assurance
dependably and
 Empathy
accurately

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 22
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

 Tangibles The

Service willingness of
Reliability the provider to
 be helpful and
Responsiveness prompt in
providing
 Assurance
• After sales service
• Example service
Empathyof standard chartered bank
and national bank.
Honor phone example in penang.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 23
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

Tangibles knowledge The

 Service and courtesy of

Reliability the employees
 and their ability
Responsiveness to inspire trust
andyou
confidence
Assurance
If you needed heart surgery, probably would
not opt for a doctor who appeared forgetful and
 Empathy
disorganized during an office consultation. Rather,
you would want assurance that the doctor is
competent.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 24
 What is Quality
PZ&B’s Service Quality Dimensions

Tangibles Caring

Service individualized
Reliability attention from
 the service firm
Responsiveness
 Assurance
Eg: Example of kababjees after sales quality ch
Phone call to its customers.
 Empathy
Eg emirates upgrade while traveling to Malaysia

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 25
 Case study.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 26
 What is Quality?

Why does it matter that different

definitions of quality exist?

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 27
 What is Quality?
Differing Functional Perspectives on Quality

Functional Perspectives on quality

include:
 Supply Chain Management
 Engineering
 Operations
 Strategic Management
 Marketing
 Financial/Accounting
 Human resources
 Project

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 28
 What is Quality?
Differing Functional Perspectives on Quality

Supply Chain Management

 Upstream activities
 Core processes
 Downstream activities

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 29
 What is Quality?
Differing Functional Perspectives on Quality

Engineering Design Life cycle

Applying mathematical
problem-solving skills
and modeling
techniques

Reliability
 Product Design
Life testing
Statistical process control
 Process Design
Common cause variations
Special cause variations

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 30
 What is Quality?
Differing Functional Perspectives on Quality
Operations
Management
Statistical Process
TheControl (SPC)
operations management view of quality is rooted in the
engineering approach. However, operations management has
grown beyond the technical engineering perspective.
Like
 . engineers, operations managers are concerned about
product and process design. However, rather than focusing on
only the technical aspects of these activities, operations
concentrates on the management of these activities. Initially,
operations quality was focused almost entirely on SPC. Later,
statistical quality control (SQC) courses became more
managerial in nature, including teachings by W. E. Deming, an
important quality expert, and others. Today, operations
management has developed into an integrative field combining
1 - 31
concepts from
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education,engineering,
Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.operations research, organizational
 What is Quality?
Differing Functional Perspectives on Quality

Operations
Management
 Uses the
systems view
that underlies
modern quality
management
thinking
Conversion System Model of Operations Managemen

System Refer to presentation 1

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 32
 What is Quality?
What is Quality?
The Three Spheres of Quality
Planning for quality improvement
•Creating a quality organizational
culture
•Providing leadership and support
•Providing training and retraining
•Designing an organizational system
that reinforces quality ideals
•Providing employee recognition
•Facilitating organizational
Failure mode and effects analysis communication
•Concurrent engineering Monitoring process capability and st
•Experimental design •Measuring process performance
•Process improvement •Reducing process variability
•Design team formation and Optimizing processes to nominal me
management •Performing acceptance sampling
•Off-line experimentation •Developing and maintaining control
•Reliability/durability product testing
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 33
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
1 - 34
 Six Sigma

 Six Sigma is a quality management methodology

used to help businesses/Projects to improve
current processes, products or services by
discovering and eliminating defects. The goal is to
streamline quality control in manufacturing
business or project processes so there is little to
no variance throughout.

 A comprehensive and flexible system for achieving,

sustaining, and maximizing business success by
minimizing defects and variability in processes.

 Six Sigma Approach Focuses on Reducing Spread

and Centering the Process

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Brief History
 Six Sigma was trademarked by Motorola in 1993, but it
references the Greek letter sigma, which is a statistical
symbol that represents a standard deviation. Motorola used
the term because a Six Sigma process is expected to be
defect-free 99.99966 percent of the time — allowing for 3.4
defective features for every million opportunities. Motorola
initially set this goal for its own manufacturing Facility, but
it quickly became a buzzword and widely adopted standard.
 Six Sigma is specifically designed to help large
organizations with quality management. In 1998, Jack
Welch, CEO of GE, helped thrust Six Sigma into the limelight
by donating upwards of $1 million as a thank you to the
company, recognizing how Six Sigma positively impacted
GE’s Projects and operations and promoting the process for
large organizations. After that, Fortune 500 companies
followed suit and Six Sigma has been popular with large
organizations ever since.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
  Six Sigma principles
 The goal in any Six Sigma project
is to identify and eliminate any
defects that are causing
variations in quality by defining a
sequence of steps around a
certain target.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 (σ )
Six Sigma –Spread &Variability

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Process Capability
 Process capability refers to
the ability of the process to
meet the design
specification for the product,
project or service
 Design specifications are
often expressed as a
nominal value and a
tolerance
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Process Capability
Nominal
value

Process distribution
Lower Upper
specification specification

Minutes
20 25 30

(a) Process is capable

Figure 5.14 – The Relationship Between a Process

Distribution and Upper and Lower
Specifications
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Process Capability
Nominal
value

Process distribution

Lower Upper
specification specification

Minutes
20 25 30

(b) Process is not capable

Figure 5.14 – The Relationship Between a Process

Distribution and Upper and Lower
Specifications
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Process Capability Nominal value

Six sigma

Four sigma

Two sigma

Lower Upper
specification specification

Mean

Figure 5.15 – Effects of Reducing Variability on

Process Capability
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
  Sigma Performance Levels-One-Six Sigma
 σ- Level – Defects /Mln Opp.(DPMO) % Good
parts
 1 690,000
31.0000%
 2 308,537
69.1463%
 3 66,807
93.3193%
 4 6,210
99.379%
 5 233
99.9767%
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Comparison of Sigma Level Errors

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

  The process capability index must be compared to a
critical value to judge whether a process is capable.
Firms striving to achieve three-sigma performance
use a critical value for the ratio of 1.0
 A firm targeting four-sigma performance will use
1.33 (or 4/3),
 A firm targeting five-sigma performance will use
1.67 (or 5/3), and
 A firm striving for six-sigma performance will use
2.00 (or 6/3).
 Processes producing services or products with less
than three-sigma performance will have Cpk values
less than 1.0.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

  If a process passes the process capability index test,
we can declare the process is capable.
 Suppose a firm desires its processes to produce at the
level of four-sigma performance.
 If Cpk is greater than or equal to the critical value
of 1.33, we can say the process is capable.
 If Cpk is less than the critical value, either the
process average is too close to one of the tolerance
limits and is generating defective output, or the
process variability is too large.
 To find out whether the variability is the culprit, we
need another test.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Process Capability
 The process capability
index measures how well a
process is centered and
whether the variability is
acceptable
x – Lower specification Upper specification – x
Cpk = Minimum of 3σ , 3σ

where
σ = standard deviation of the process distribution
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Process Capability
 The process capability
ratio tests whether
process variability is
the cause of problems

Cp = Upper specification – Lower specification

6σ

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as

Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Process Capability

 Video 1
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=WHpW5lVbuqU

 Video 2
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=wPRd2RgoC0E
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Assessing Process Capability
EXAMPLE 5.5
 The intensive care unit lab process has an
average turnaround time of 26.2 minutes
and a standard deviation of 1.35 minutes
 The nominal value for this service is 25
minutes with an upper specification limit of
30 minutes and a lower specification limit of
20 minutes
 The administrator of the lab wants to have
four-sigma performance for her lab
 Is the lab process capable of this level of
performance?

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as

Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Assessing Process Capability
SOLUTION
The administrator began by taking a
quick check to see if the process is
capable by applying the process
26.2 – 20.0
Lower specification
capability index: calculation = = 1.53
3(1.35)
30.0 – 26.2
Upper specification calculation = = 0.94
3(1.35)

Cpk = Minimum of [1.53, 0.94] = 0.94

Since the target value for four-sigma

performance is 1.33, the process capability
index told her that the process was not
capable. However, she did not know whether
the problem was the variability of the process,
the centering of the process, or both. The
options available to improve the process
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Assessing Process Capability
She next checked the process variability
with the process capability ratio:

30.0 – 20.0
Cp = = 1.23
6(1.35)

The process variability did not meet the four-

sigma target of 1.33. Consequently, she
initiated a study to see where variability was
introduced into the process. Two activities,
report preparation and specimen slide
preparation, were identified as having
inconsistent procedures. These procedures
were modified to provide consistent
performance. New data were collected and the
average turnaround was now 26.1 minutes with
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
a standard
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing deviation
Prentice Hall.
as Prentice Hall. of 1.20 minutes.
 Assessing Process Capability
She now had the process variability at
the four-sigma level of performance, as
indicated by the process capability ratio:
30.0 – 20.0
Cp = = 1.39
6(1.20)

However, the process capability index

indicated additional problems to resolve:

(26.1 – 20.0)
(30.0 – 26.1)
Cpk =Minimum of , = 1.08
3(1.20) 3(1.20)

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as

Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Application 5.4
Webster Chemical’s nominal weight for filling
tubes of caulk is 8.00 ounces ± 0.60 ounces.
The target process capability ratio is 1.33,
signifying that management wants 4-sigma
performance. The current distribution of the
filling process is centered on 8.054 ounces
with a standard deviation of 0.192 ounces.
Compute the process capability index and
process capability ratio to assess whether
the filling process is capable and set
properly.

Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as

Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Application 5.4
a. Process capability index:

x – Lower specification
Upper specification – x
Cpk = Minimum of ,
3σ 3σ

8.054 – 7.400 8.600 – 8.054

= Minimum of = 1.135, = 0.948
3(0.192) 3(0.192)

Recall that a capability index value of 1.0

implies that the firm is producing three-sigma
quality (0.26% defects) and that the process
is consistently producing outputs within
specifications even though some defects are
generated. The value of 0.948 is far below the
target of 1.33. Therefore, we can conclude
that the process is not capable. Furthermore,
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
we do
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, not know
Inc. Publishing as Prentice if
Hall.the problem is centering or
Prentice Hall.
 Application 5.4
b. Process capability ratio:

Upper specification – Lower specification

8.60 – 7.40
Cp = = = 1.0417
6σ 6(0.192)

Recall that if the Cpk is greater than the critical

value (1.33 for four-sigma quality) we can
conclude that the process is capable. Since
the Cpk is less than the critical value, either the
process average is close to one of the
tolerance limits and is generating defective
output, or the process variability is too large.
The value of Cp is less than the target for four-
sigma quality. Therefore we conclude that the
process variability
as Prentice Hall. must be addressed first,
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as
Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing
 Statistical Process Control
 Statistical process control (SPC) is the application of
statistical techniques to determine whether a process
is delivering what customers want.
 In SPC, tools called control charts are used primarily
to detect defective services or products or to indicate
that the process has changed and that services or
products will deviate from their design specifications,
unless something is done to correct the situation.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Variation of Outputs

 Common causes of variation : The purely random,

unidentifiable sources of variation that are
unavoidable with the current process.

 Assignable causes of variation : also known as

special causes, includes any variation-causing
factors that can be identified and eliminated.
Assignable causes of variation include an employee
needing training or a machine needing repair.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D6Wn8ym7
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Common Causes

Relationship
Between the
Distribution
of Sample
Means and
the Process
Distribution

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Assignable
Causes

 Effects of
Assignabl
e Causes
on the
Process
Distributio
n for the
Lab
Analysis
Process
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Control Charts

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Use of control charts
 Control charts are not perfect tools
for detecting shifts in the process
distribution because they are based
on sampling distributions. Two
types of error are possible with the
use of control charts.
 type I error
 type II error

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

  Type I error : An error that occurs when the
employee concludes that the process is out of
control based on a sample result that falls outside
the control limits, when in fact it was due to pure
randomness

 Type II error : An error that occurs when the

employee concludes that the process is in control
and only randomness is present, when actually the
process is out of statistical control.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

Two types of control charts
1.Control charts for variables
2.Control charts for attributes

Control charts for variables

 Control charts for variables are used to monitor the
mean and the variability of the process distribution.

 R chart
 X chart

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 A range chart, or R-chart, is used to monitor
process variability. To calculate the range of
a set of sample data, the analyst subtracts
the smallest from the largest measurement in
each sample. If any of the ranges fall outside
the control limits, the process variability is
not in control.
R-Chart

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 An x-Chart (read “x-bar chart”) is used to see
whether the process is generating output, on
average, consistent with a target value set by
management for the process or whether its
current performance, with respect to the
average of the performance measure, is
consistent with its past performance. A target
value is useful when a process is completely
redesigned and past performance is no longer
X-Bar Chart

relevant. When the assignable causes of process

variability have been identified and the process
variability is in statistical control, the analyst
can then construct an x-chart.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Variables
R-Chart

UCLR = D4R and LCLR = D3R

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Variables
x-Chart
UCL= + A2 and LCL = -A2
where
= central line of the chart, which can be
either the average of past sample means or a
target value set for the process
A2 = constant to provide three-sigma limits
for the sample mean

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Variables

Table 3.1

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Variables
Steps to Compute Control
Charts:
1. Collect data.
2. Compute the range.
3. Use Table 3.1 to determine R-chart
control limits.
4. Plot the sample ranges. If all are in
control, proceed to step 5. Otherwise,
find the assignable causes, correct
them, and return to step 1.
5. Calculate for each sample and
determine the central line of the
chart,
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Control Charts for Variables
Steps to Compute Control
Charts:
6. Use Table 3.1 to determine control
limits
7. Plot the sample means. If all are in
control, the process is in statistical
control. Continue to take samples
and monitor the process. If any are
out of control, find the assignable
causes, correct them, and return to
step 1.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.1
The management of West Allis Industries is concerned
about the production of a special metal screw used by
several of the company’s largest customers. The diameter
of the screw is critical to the customers. Data from five
samples appear in the accompanying table. The sample
size is 4. Is the processOBSERVATION
in statistical control?
Sampl 1 2 S 3 4 R
e
Numb
er
1 .501 .5022 .5009 .5027 .0018 .5018
4
2 .502 .5041 .5024 .5020 .0021 .5027
1
3 .501 .5026 .5035 .5023 .0017 .5026
8 Average .0021
4 .500 .5034 .5024 .5015
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
.0026.5027
.5020
 Example 3.1
Compute the range for each
sample and the control limits

UCLR = D2.282(0.0021)
4 = 0.00479 in.
R=
LCLR = D3 R0(0.0021)
= = 0 in.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.1

Process variability is in
Figure 3.9
statistical control.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Example 3.1
Compute the mean for each
sample and the control limits.

UCLx = X += A0.5027
2R +
0.729(0.0021) =
0.5042 in.
LCLx = X = 0.5027 –
– A2 R 0.729(0.0021) =
0.5012 in.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Example 3.1

Process average is NOT in statistical

Figure
3.10 control.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Solved Example
The Watson Electric Company produces incandescent light
bulbs. The following data on the number of lumens for 40-
watt light bulbs were collected when the process was in
control.
a. Calculate control limits for an R-chart and an x-chart.
b. Since these data were collected, some new employees
were hired. A new sample obtained the following readings:
625, 592, 612, and 635. Is the process still in control?

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Class Practice
Aspen Plastics produces plastic bottles to customer
order. The quality inspector randomly selects four
bottles from the bottle machine and measures the
outside diameter of the bottle neck, a critical quality
dimension that determines whether the bottle cap will
fit properly. The dimensions (inch) from the last six
samples are

Assume that only these six samples are sufficient,

and use the data to determine control limits for an R-
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Control Charts
 Variable Control Charts
 R-Chart – Measures the variability of the process
 -Chart – Measures whether the process is
generating output, on average, consistent with a
target value

 Attribute Control Charts

 p-chart – Measures the proportion of defective
services or products generated by the process
 c-chart – Measures the number of defects when
more than one defect can be present in a service
or product

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 For example, in the banking industry, the
attributes counted might be the number of non-
endorsed deposits or the number of incorrect
financial statements sent to customers. The
method involves selecting a random sample,
inspecting each item in it, and calculating the
sample proportion defective, p, which is the
number of defective units divided by the sample
size. (checking of shipment)
p-Charts

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 c-Charts Sometimes services or products have
more than one defect. For example, a roll of
carpeting may have several defects, such as
tufted or discolored fibers or stains from the
production process. Other situations in which
more than one defect may occur include accidents
at a particular intersection, bubbles in a television
picture face panel, and complaints from a patron
at a hotel. When management is interested in
reducing the number of defects per unit or service
encounter, the c-chart, is useful.
c-Chart

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Attributes
 p-charts are used for controlling the
proportion of defective services or products
generated by the process.
 The standard deviation is
 p  p 1  p  / n

p = the center line on the chart

UCLp = + zσp and LCLp= – zσp

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.3
• Hometown Bank is concerned
about the number of wrong
customer account numbers
recorded. Each week a random
sample of 2,500 deposits is
taken and the number of
incorrect account numbers is
recorded
• Using three-sigma control
limits, which will provide a Type
I error of 0.26 percent, is the
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Example 3.3
Sample Wrong Account Sample Wrong Account
Number Numbers Number Numbers

1 15 7 24

2 12 8 7

3 19 9 10

4 2 10 17

5 19 11 15

6 4 12 3

Total 147

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.3
Total defectives 147
p= = = 0.004
Total number of observations12(2,500)

σp = (1 – )/n = 0.0049(1 – 0.0049)/2,500 = 0.0014

UCLp = p + z=σ0.0049
p + 3(0.0014) = 0.0091

LCLp = p – =
zσ0.0049
p – 3(0.0014) = 0.0007

Calculate the sample proportion defective and plot each

sample proportion defective on the chart.
Step 2. Calculate each sample
proportion defective. For sample 1, the
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Example 3.3
Fraction Defective

X
UCL
.0091
X X
X
X X
X Mean
.0049 X
X
X X
X LCL
| | | | | | | | | | | |
.0007
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sample

The process is NOT in statistical control

Figure
3.11
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Application 3.2
A sticky scale brings Webster’s attention to
whether caulking tubes are being properly
capped. If a significant proportion of the tubes
aren’t being sealed, Webster is placing their
customers in a messy situation. Tubes are
packaged in large boxes of 144. Several boxes
are inspected and the following numbers of
leaking tubes are found:
Sampl Sample Sampl Tubes
e Tubes Tubes e

1 3 8 6 15 5
2 5 9 4 16 0
3 3 10 9 17 2
4 4 11 2 18 6
5 2 12 6 19 2
6 4 13 5 20 1
7
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, 2 as Prentice Hall.
Inc. Publishing 14 1 Total = 72
 Application 3.2
Calculate the p-chart three-sigma control limits
to assess whether the capping process is in
statistical control.
Total number of leaky tubes 72
p= Total number of tubes= = 0.025
20(144)

p (1 – p ) 0.025(1 –
σ n = 0.025) =
pUCL = p + zσ
144 0.01
=p 0.025 + 3(0.01301)= 0.06403
301
p
=
LCLp = p – zσ=p 0.025 – 3(0.01301)= –0.01403 = 0

The process is in control as the p values

for the samples all fall within the control
limits.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Control Charts for Attributes
 c-charts – A chart used for controlling the
number of defects when more than one
defect can be present in a service or
product.

• The mean of the distribution is and

the standard deviation is

UCLc = c + LCLc = c – z
zc c

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.4
The Woodland Paper Company produces paper
for the newspaper industry. As a final step in
the process, the paper passes through a
machine that measures various product
quality characteristics. When the paper
production process is in control, it averages
a.
20Set up a control
defects per roll.chart for the number of
defects per roll. For this example, use two-
sigma control limits.
b. Five rolls had the following number of
defects: 16, 21, 17, 22, and 24,
respectively. The sixth roll, using pulp
from a different supplier, had 5 defects. Is
the paper production process in control?
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Example 3.4
a. The average number of defects per roll is 20. Therefore
UCLc= + z = 20 + 2(20) = 28.94

LCLc = -z = 20 – 2(20) = 11.06

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Example 3.4
b.

The process is technically out of control due to

Sample 6. However, Sample 6 shows that the
new
Figure supplier is a good one.
3.12
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Application 3.3
At Webster Chemical, lumps in the caulking compound could
cause difficulties in dispensing a smooth bead from the tube.
Even when the process is in control, there will still be an
average of 4 lumps per tube of caulk. Testing for the presence
of lumps destroys the product, so Webster takes random
samples. The following are results of the study:
Tube Lum Tube Lum Tube Lum
# ps # ps # ps
1 6 5 6 9 5
2 5 6 4 10 0
3 0 7 1 11 9
4 4 8 6 12 2
Determine the c-chart two-sigma upper and
lower control limits for this process.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
 Application Problem 3.3
6  5  0  4  6  4  1 6  5  0  9  2
4
12

c  4 2

4  22   8

4  22   0

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 Control Charts for Attributes
 Two charts commonly used for
performance measures based on
attributes measures are the
 p- chart and
 c-chart.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

 `

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
Printed in the United States of America.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.

1 - 98