Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

IIE Call For Paper

1,391

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,391
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Description of the Implementation Strategy for Process Certification (Six Sigma) at Hamilton Sundstrand, United Technologies Corporation Mark Milward & Pete Teti, Hamilton Sundstrand, UTC November 14, 2008 Background The quality and continuous improvement strategy of United Technologies Corporation is referred to as the Achieving Competitive Excellence (ACE) Operating system. The objectives of ACE are to add value to customers, investors, businesses and communities. Within this systems arsenal of tactical and strategic applications is the tool called Process Certification, which is the variability reduction and control arm of ACE. Process Certification is a system unto itself and parallels the Six Sigma compendium of statistical tools and techniques. The two variability reduction systems differ primarily in terms of definitions and project designs. The methods used to obtain the quality and productivity objectives are identical and uses the familiar Six Sigma tools, (i.e. SPC, MSA, DOE, DMAIC, etc.). Likewise, the financial objective is aimed at achieving significant cost reductions that will impact the organizations’ bottom-line. At Hamilton Sundstrand, a division of UTC, the journey to develop a state-of the-art Six Sigma type program evolved from many years of applications using statistical process control (SPC) methods and other quality related tools. This paper is a description of that systems design and can be used as a guide for development and structuring of a variation reduction program within any organization. In October 2006, Hamilton Sundstrand, held a weeklong Process Certification kaizen event on the Windsor Locks campus. This event brought together SPC, Process Certification, and Six Sigma experts from across Hamilton Sundstrand (HS) and other UTC plant sites. The objective was to implement a program that would enable a consistency in practices and procedures throughout the various enterprises. Outlining the Challenge Planning of the Process Certification kaizen event was an important step towards establishing a program that could be replicated throughout all of Hamilton Sundstrand. The participation of key individuals representing the various sites accelerated implementation activity and improved communication avenues for a uniformed approach. Identification of key system components (Figure 1.0) was essential and particularly useful in guiding the team’s efforts to examine the fundamental requirements for developing a successful program. The Production, Planning, Preparation (3P) formula was applied and teams developed standard work, established criteria for evaluation and selection of key characteristics, and determined requirements for statistical process control data collection and reporting systems. The formation of these teams and the 1
  • 2. results of their efforts represent the foundation upon which the Process Certification program was established and is now driven. Process Certification Procedures Standard Work INTERNAL HS SUPPLIERS Data Collection & Reporting Systems Training Figure 1.0 - Key System Components for Process Certification Implementation UTCQR-09.1 Process Certification The procedural requirements for variation reduction and control were developed by the UTC Process Certification Council. The council is represented by key contributors from the divisions of UTC; Pratt & Whitney, Hamilton Sundstrand (HS), Sikorsky Aircraft, Otis Elevator, Carrier, UTC Power and UTC Research Center. Specifications and requirements are detailed in the procedure UTCQR-09.1. This procedure says that all UTC members, producers, and their sub-tier suppliers that provide goods, services, and key characteristics or processes identified for certification by the UTC members shall implement a process control system that satisfies this requirement. To meet these requirements the key system components were reviewed and analyzed as measurable steps were taken to ensure compliance. Training and orientation on ProCert principles was required for all associates at varying proficiency levels. Both web-based ProCert courses and instructor led training classes were delivered to support 2
  • 3. production readiness and program implementation strategies. Steering committees were formed and the vision of the mission was created and communicated using all available communication channels. Given the magnitude and complexity of the task, the formation of the Process Certification kaizen teams presented an excellent opportunity for a coordinated effort that would aid in ensuring that the uniformity and consistency needs would be established. The requirements of UTCQR-09.1 also had to be flowed into the Supply Base and where various UTC businesses shared the same Suppliers. Process Certification Kaizen Teams - Standard Work and Procedures Team - Engineering Classification of Characteristics Team - Process Certification Systems Team Process Certification Milestones Facilitation of Process Certification objectives is engineered through four milestones (Figure 2.0). They comprise a schedule of activities and requirements that composes a project management model. Approximate time completion for each milestone is three months. CTQ is the acronym used for Critical-To-Quality characteristics for a product, process, or service. CTQs are defined along with Key Product Characteristics (KPCs) and are managed throughout these timeframes. It is a disciplined approach taken to achieve certification of the product or process. Certification is achieved when a Cpk value of 1.33 or greater is obtained. Figure 2.0 Process Certification – The Four Key Milestones MILESTONE 11 MILESTONE 2 MILESTONE 3 MILESTONE 4 MILESTONE 44 MILESTONE Definition MILESTONE 2 Baseline Performance MILESTONE 3 Improvement & Control MILESTONE Process Excellence Prepare Control Plan Achieve “certified” process Define CTQ Parts Evaluate stability Cpk=1.33 or better Perform Gage Capability Study Evaluate capability Evaluate for Safety Control Plan reflects Begin Data Collection Improve process Determine FSCs certified process Initial Control Chart Complete Control Plan Determine KPCs Self audit plan in place Capability Snapshot Achieve Cpk=1.0 or better Document on Floreti Chart Action items from past Electronic Control Plan KPC data evidenced in Flowdown to Producer assessments closed out established in KPC Database KPC Database Primary Control Plan Perform Milestone 4 Perform KCR Assessment Self-audit plan in place established in KPC Database Assessment Perform UTCQR-09.1 Perform Milestone 3 Form 2 Assessment Assessment Perform DQA Assessment 3
  • 4. Understanding the Critical Success Factors An empirical study performed on the Critical Success Factors of Six Sigma Implementation identified several success factors (Lee, 2002). Among the primary success factors are, the leadership of top management, statistical/ analytical tool usage, Six Sigma training programs, and the technical competence of implementation team members. The significance of the correlation between these success factors and the key system components (Figure 1.0) previously defined is substantiated by the implementation results at Hamilton Sundstrand (HS) plant sites. The combination and effectiveness of these factors is what drove the successful deployment. Understanding the importance of these factors helped shape the teams’ direction and alignment towards the overall goals and objectives. The leadership and commitment of senior management in the deployment effort is the most important factor and cannot be overstated. Engineering Classification of Characteristics “How do we select what’s important?” Much of the work done in developing Process Certification at UTC had previously been pioneered by our sister company, Pratt & Whitney Aircraft (P&WA). Members of P&WA participated as consultants in developing the HS program. Following the P&WA structure, procedures and practices were modified to address the specific requirements of the HS business enterprises. From P&WA’s procedure (PW79345), the HS procedure was written on the selection and classification of Key Product Characteristics. Identifying and selecting Critical-to-Quality (CTQ) parts is the first step in determining what is important to internal and external customers. Selection criteria include Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), part family history, known internal and supplier escapes, warranty history, field returns or recalls, customer input, MRB data and service history. The detailed guidelines for the selection process are covered in HSC16199 (Management & Classification of Critical to Quality Characteristics 2007, C. Houk). Within the framework of Milestone 1 the evaluation and selection of CTQ parts and the subsequent Key Product Characteristics (KPCs) is the responsibility of an Integrated Product Development team (IPD). Figures 3.0 & 3.1 illustrate the Critical-to-Quality Characteristic Selection Process developed during the October 2006 Kaizen Event and now part of the HS Process Certification standard work. Utilizing this process has helped HS engineers select lower-level Key Product Characteristics that affect upper-level Customer CTQs in a very consistent manner regardless of product type. Several of the primary HS characteristics identified in HSC16199 and their definitions are listed in Table 1: Table 1 Definitions Designation Definition Critical to Quality (CTQ) Parts that can directly affect safety, mission essential or critical performance parameters. Critical to Quality parts may also be identified for customer satisfaction and contain one or more Critical to Quality Characteristics. Critical to Safety Elements or functions of a part or assembly that have the greatest impact to Characteristic (CTSC) the safety of the product. Critical to Quality Elements or functions of a part or assembly that have the greatest impact to Characteristic (CTQC) the quality or operation of the product. These elements typically represent the Voice-of-the-Customer (VOC) and what they deem critical to function and performance. Table 1 (continued) 4
  • 5. Flight Safety Part (FSP) A detail part, assembly containment system(s) software, whose failure or malfunction (e.g. failure to operate due to improper assembly, installation process, omission of parts, wear, etc.) could directly result in an unsafe condition, or whose failure or malfunction causes a subsequent failure(s) which could directly result in an unsafe condition. Frozen Process A documented process that cannot be changed without engineering review/approval of the Customer. It consists of the steps required for manufacture, rework/repair, maintenance or assembly of one or more Flight Safety Characteristics. This process must be documented in sufficient detail to ensure multiple operators consistently perform those steps that deliver the desired product characteristics. Unsafe condition A condition which could directly result in the loss of aircraft or loss of life. KPC1 designation (Critical An observable characteristic (such as a dimension or feature) of a part, Characteristic) assembly, subassembly or system, that if not produced within the prescribed acceptance limits, could directly result in an unsafe catastrophic condition. KPC2 designation (Critical Features of a part, assembly, subassembly or system, that if not produced Characteristic) within the prescribed acceptance limits, would most likely result in mission abort, failure to launch, prevent readiness for use, or result in extreme customer dissatisfaction. These features typically are selected based on form, fit, function, performance, reliability or manufacturability purposes. Flight Safety Characteristic A feature or part characteristic which, if nonconforming, could result in an (FSC) unsafe or catastrophic condition. Flight safety characteristics are identified with the symbol (*). Flight safety characteristics are reviewed, evaluated, and monitored for over sight by a Flight Safety Parts Review Board (FSPRB). Minor Characteristics Minor characteristics are not identified by symbols and comprise all other features not defined as a Flight Safety Characteristic, KPC1 or KPC2 characteristic. Minor characteristics are important for general product quality, but nonconformance is not likely to create a significant impairment to product performance or reliability. Box 0 Minor characteristic indicating an effective sampling rate of 100% Box 2 Minor characteristic indicating an effective sampling rate of .65% AQL. Descriptive terminology and classification of characteristics cover a wide range of business enterprises, but is not all inclusive for the entire HS organization. The developmental approach for selection 5
  • 6. classification, key characteristic descriptions and criteria for selection is accomplished through project team reviews following the existing standard work. As additional needs are defined adjustments to the existing standard work is performed to address specific application requirements. Figure 3.0 General Process for CTQ/KPC Selection (Engineering) Customer Customer Customer Turnback Data Complaints/MFA Requirements CTQ Elements Analysis & VOC All Parts/ Assemblies No Does the Part/ Safety Part/ No Assembly Impact Assembly? CTQ Elements? Non CTQ Part Yes Yes Decision at Part/Assembly Level CTSC Source Control/Vendor Item Drawings CTQC Box 2 HSC Designed Items YES Does the Benefit to Could Characteristic Minor No Characteristic Affect No Increased NO Create an Unsafe Characteristic CTQ Elements? Inspection? Condition? Yes No YES Yes Box 0 Benefit from Benefit from Variation Variation Management? Management? No Yes Engineering Discretion Yes FSC KPC1 (Frozen Characteristic KPC2 Process) Characteristic Flight/Industrial Safety Parts CTQ PARTS Figure. 3.1 General Process for FSC/KPC Selection 6
  • 7. Evaluate all Safety Modes and mechanisms Can Non-Conforming Characteristic No Evaluate for KPC2 Result in Unsafe Condition Yes Is the characteristic directly observable? Yes No Is the characteristic completely defined in a manner No FSC that allows direct inspection? No Yes Can the process, procedure or sequence used to produce the characteristic be changed without impact to the characteristic? Yes KPC1 Standard Work and Procedures “What do we do with what’s important?” At UTC standard work is defined as the creation of repeatable, effective and efficient processes. Various documentation formats are presented for this purpose. Successful implementation of the Process Certification program at Hamilton Sundstrand is in part due to the effective application of standard work procedures established. Critical success factors have been combined into a formula that is straight forward and very effective. Procedures developed by the Standards Work team were directed at providing instructions at systems level, functional level, site level, and department level operational requirements. System level documents such as HT0985 (Process Certification, 2007, P. Teti) and HT0990 (Manufacturing Process Review, 2007, P. Teti) are procedures that identify individual roles and responsibilities and explains “how to” (HT) perform specific tasks necessary to facilitate milestone activities. Standard work maps, with activity pages and work instructions guide actions required to progress through each step in Process Certification execution. Standard work is also written at levels that 7
  • 8. define how to perform routines in the SPC data collection system, Minitab, Cp/Cpk report generation, and maintaining and updating KPC and ProCert information databases. The teams are consistently reviewing and revising standard work maps to ensure that they are addressing changing requirements. According to Forrest W. Breyfogle, (Implementing Six Sigma, 1999) if an organization does not apply Six Sigma techniques wisely, it will fail. “There is the tendency to believe that the statistical techniques are not useful, when in fact the real problem is how the program was implemented and/or how the techniques were not effectively applied.” Knowing what to do and how to perform important tasks is essential. Process Certification Systems “Tools & logistics supporting execution of what’s important” HS has established a centralized web based KPC Database for storage, categorization, and tracking of Key Product Characteristics through milestone progression. This is a task of immense importance. The accurate analysis and maintenance of data is the life blood of an efficient Process Certification system. The KPC Database enables the uploading and downloading of critical key characteristic information for internal operations and the Supply base. The database contains electronic control plans for certification of key characteristics by either part number or process type. Certification is achieved when key characteristics meet or exceed a 1.33 Cpk value. Information obtained from the KPC Database is also used for management reporting to senior executives who review status of KPC milestone progression across the various plant sites. Each month executives review the total number of KPCs at a site, milestone status, Cpk level, and actual performance against the schedule. Statistical Process Control (SPC) data collection monitoring and control is performed using SPC Proficy© data collection software, a GE Fanuc product. In terms of priority the establishment of a statistical and analytical data collection system ranks number #2 on the list of critical success factors for the successful implementation of a Process Certification system. Efforts are currently in progress to establish connectivity between the SPC Proficy© data collection system and the KPC Database in order to obtain greater efficiency and maximization of Process Certification system utilization. The final system within the Process Certification systems category is the Process Certification Database (Figure 4.0). This database contains information supporting infrastructure development and Process Certification activities for Mechanical Operations WL. It also serves as a primary tool of our communication strategy on Process Certification. The database is updated daily, weekly, and monthly. It contains the SPC/KPC data collection statuses, low Cpk reports, ProCert project activities, standard work, organization charts and other relevant information. Figure 4.0 Process Certification Database 8
  • 9. Process Certification Steering Committees Committed leadership from the top is the essential ingredient for a successful program. The presence of top talent within functional roles solidifies the framework for achieving positive results. The UTC Process Certification Council directs the requirements for Process Certification for all UTC businesses. Requirements defined in UTCQR-09.1 are specified on purchase orders to external suppliers and sub tier suppliers. Mechanical Operations’ site level steering committee provides oversight for Process Certification deployment on internal manufacturing processes in the Windsor Locks facility. Non-manufacturing processes are not experiencing significant ProCert development. The WL ProCert site steering committee monitors COPQ Black Belt and Green Belt projects. The steering committee also identifies and selects projects, directs resources and champions the overall ProCert objectives. The Material Corrective Action Board (MCAB) is a forum where process reviews occur weekly. A senior executive team (Working Together Team) also meets weekly to drive quality strategies and communicate the top down commitment on initiatives. ProCert organizational charts reflect a high degree of management participation. The various committee and council meetings are held weekly, monthly and quarterly. Active participation of reviews on project statuses is performed regularly. Reviews of Black Belt and Green Belt project status are examined to communicate DMAIC progression and reviews of Six Sigma tool usage. The Process Certification kaizen event that occurred in October 2006 also saw the formation of the Process Certification Implementation Council. Its objective is to remain a focal point and catalyst for the continuous development of the program. The council is represented by the various HS enterprises and led by the HS Director of Process Certification. The meetings are quarterly and occur over a 2-3 day period. Current issues on key system components are reviewed with team members brainstorming on corrective actions and problem resolutions. It is an important gathering that closes communication gaps and 9
  • 10. expedites resolutions on issues that are stalled because of plant site distances or situational matters that require the presence of key individuals. Committed Leadership “Making sure there is a strong connection between customers and the daily work of our employees is a key attribute of a Lean Sigma approach. Here at UTC’s HS, we leverage our ACE operating system to accomplish that goal. In fact, we assess every organization on the effectiveness to which they meet their customer goals. Continuous improvements are stressed through the organization and achievements are recognized in levels of metals starting at Bronze, then Silver and ultimately Gold. One key attribute of the assessment is a sites’ ability to eliminate customer escapes. To maximize our ability to improve product quality the senior leadership team at HS created a Working Together Team (WTT). The team is chaired by our division Presidents and represented by Functional Vice Presidents. Progress on our Quality initiatives is so important that we meet every week to discuss progress and effectiveness of the key initiatives. The leadership team has selected seven (7) key initiatives to drive both improved reactive and proactive quality. One key initiative is the use of Process Certification as a means to link our Engineering designs with our customer’s expectations and manufacturing capabilities.” Don McDonald, Vice President of Quality “Within UTC and Hamilton Sundstrand we apply the tools and techniques of Lean/Six Sigma as part of our Achieving Competitive Excellence (ACE) operating system. The key in maximizing the benefit of these techniques is to apply them as part of an integrated approach to how we execute our jobs every day. Eliminating waste and/or achieving excellence requires a balance of small continuous improvements along with focused significant improvements targeted around delivering stakeholder satisfaction. The tools and techniques applied also require the selection of the right tool for the desired result. This requires a broad knowledge across the organization of a variety of tools, from statistical process control, to process mistake proofing, to total productive maintenance. The selection of the right tool requires us to clearly define our objectives and evaluate which tool(s) will best help us achieve our goals. The recipe is simple but requires constant reinforcement to be successful. Focus on the customer, work from data, and empowerment of a knowledgeable workforce to apply the right tools at the right time to constantly improve performance.” Roger Stamm, Director, Process Certification “Our goal is to provide our customers with a competitive product that is unsurpassed in quality. It is no longer good enough to just understand how the products we build go together. It is more important to identify those key characteristics that will provide us with our desired state of 1.33 Cpk performances or higher. Being competitive means understanding and predicting the outcome through the use of key characteristic data, and clearly understanding upper and lower control limits to ensure defect free quality in performance and yields. Through the MCAB process we solve problems beginning with a fault tree analysis and continue the investigation to determine root cause by using techniques such as a 5-Why analysis. Sooner or later we get to that point of asking the question on what key characteristic is important to producing the quality we need. Understanding how things go to together is important, but if the data is used properly it provides information that identifies variables that when controlled ensure product reliability.” Tom Bradley, AMS Business Unit Mgr., Mechanical Operations 10
  • 11. HS Internal - Mechanical Operations WL Mechanical Operations (WL) has developed an infrastructure that is benchmarked by other HS divisions and businesses. Factors contributing to its success and development are a combination of committed leadership, depth of knowledge and experience, and the establishment of training programs aimed at increasing skills and participation in Process Certification activities. Targeted training levels are at 100%. All associates are required to complete an introductory course on Process Certification. Manufacturing Engineers, Quality Engineers and selected supervision in the division are required to complete Green Belt training. Black Belt training is also conducted internally and certification standards are in accordance with UTC ProCert certification requirements. Additionally, certified Black Belts at Hamilton Sundstrand are further recognized as individuals seek certification through the American Society for Quality (ASQ) and to the ASQ Body of Knowledge. Training as an ASQ Certified Quality Engineer (CQE) is also offered internally. There is a continuous effort to refine key system components within the organization. The infrastructure supporting these systems and procedures is highly visible. Leading change towards a Process Certification mindset requires a change in culture, environment and behavior. Establishing visual controls and management techniques that create an environment reflective of the initiative is very important. Plans are now underway to construct the ACE/ProCert Operating Center. This facility will replace the previous Process Certification Training Center and consolidate the entire toolbox of ACE strategies within a centralized area for facilitating ACE and ProCert initiatives. Activities will include kaizen events, ProCert training, Black Belt and Green Belt project meetings, Relentless Root Cause Analysis investigations, MCAB meetings, and SPC standard work development. The ACE/ProCert Operating Center will provide a significant operational capability that would also support an infrastructure for training and development in Mechanical Operations. The Mech Ops Newsletter published monthly features articles that communicate the latest Process Certification developments. Articles cover information regarding the statistical process control data collection system (i.e. SPC Proficy©) which is routinely upgraded to expand capability and effectiveness. Success stories on Black Belt and Green Belt project activity is also highlighted and proactive approaches using ProCert tools to improve customer satisfaction and cost of poor quality (COPQ) reduction is presented. Supply Base - Supplier Quality & Development Since over 80% of all engineering defined KPCs are on parts produced by an HS supplier, it was clear from the start that much of the Process Certification implementation effort would have to be external to HS. The development of Suppliers to meet Process Certification requirements posed a tremendous challenge. The responsibility was given to the Supplier Quality & Development (SQ&D) Group. Once it was determined which Suppliers were going to be the manufacturer of CTQ Parts, SQ&D began to conduct a series of “Key Characteristic Reviews (KCR)” and learned how supplier capability and performance levels varied. The KCR was designed to provide the Supplier with the needed training in order to meet the requirements of UTCQR-09.1. Suppliers learned how to prepare Control Plans, perform Gage Capability Studies, implement Control Charts, calculate Process Capability Indexes Cp & Cpk and upload the compliance data for each KPC back to HS using the “Supplier Upload Tool. Figure 5.0 below shows the overall process steps a supplier needs to take when a KPC is identified on the engineering drawing they are contracted to build product to. 11
  • 12. OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM FUNCTIONALITY Provides real-time SPC analysis Visual SPC System 12345 ABC Company ABC Company Primary Control Plan Site Specific Plan Real-Time SPC KPC Entry Web-Page Supplier Upload Tool - KPC gets loaded - Supplier fills in Control - Supplier collects - Supplier accesses KPC - Supplier enters ProCert - Email notification - KPIs, Gage Study data at machine Webpage to select P/N(s) data into Upload Tool to Supplier and Initial Process from pick-list they are authorized - Alerts will be generated - Milestone tracking Capability results to report on depending on Cpk recorded performance Figure 5.0 Per Figure 5.0 above, the Supplier, prior to producing a CTQ Part, will prepare an Electronic Control Plan, perform a Gage Capability Study on the measurement system used to inspect the KPC, collect SPC data on control charts, and enter SPC summary statistics into the HS KPC Database. This allows HS Supplier Quality to monitor compliance to Customer requirements. The requirements of UTCQR-09.1 (Process Certification) are one of several specifications that must be met to obtain an HS preferred supplier status. HS SQ&D also prepares a three-day training program taught to the supply base, free of charge. Suppliers learn the key concepts of KPC Selection, FMEA, Control Plan Preparation, Control Charts, Process Capability, Gage Capability Studies and Introduction to Design of Experiments. Since 2006, over 100 suppliers have attended this popular program. Typical statistical training exercises are conducted in an interactive environment using tools such as Minitab statistical software, Catapults and Deming Bead Boxes. . Implementation Results Process Certification initiatives at Hamilton Sundstrand have not yet reached its full maturity. Current results reflect increased customer satisfaction and bottom line savings. A statement from Boeing’s Procurement Quality Specialist who reviewed the HS ProCert program in March 2008 reads “Hamilton Sundstrand has made significant strides in their Variation Management of key characteristics system since last years assessment. Building from the ACE program, HS-CT has made improvements in identifying key processes, analyzing these key processes, controlling variation and implementing improvement projects.” In early 2008, Mechanical Operations WL began its Green Belt/Black Belt project initiative. Green Belt projects fell into the classification of those operations performing at a capability less than 1.0 Cpk. Out of thirty (30) projects there has been an improvement on over 60% and with Cpk values now above 1.0. A Black Belt project comprised of cross functional team members delivered COPQ savings exceeding $500K on the very first project undertaken and proving the value of the DMAIC models’ use in cost reduction. These initial successes help to gain “buy in” and open doors for more significant opportunities. Overall success factors must be grouped into three broad categories, aside from application of the key system components previously illustrated. Industry experts point towards the primary keys to success as: 12
  • 13. ● Committed leadership ● Top talent ● Supporting infrastructure (2003, Leading Six Sigma, Snee, Hoerl) The development of the Process Certification system at HS has grown steadily. Progress has been made in incremental stages. The effectiveness of the applications has been substantiated by the fact that not a single escape has occurred within a process that has been certified to the Process Certification standard (1.33). A proactive approach to identify Process Certification opportunities continues to grow. Efforts to increase the number of ASQ certified Black Belts at HS has begun with an intent on increasing project activity and capturing the savings potential in high cost and low performance areas of the business. Process Certification plays a vital role in the HS journey towards ACE Gold level achievement. Business and transactional applications is the next likely target as awareness expands and the organization transforms its views, perspectives and actions in the performance of daily tasks. MARK D. MILWARD, CQA, CSSBB PETER E. TETI, CQE, CQA, CQMgr Fmr. Manager, Process Certification Supplier Quality & Development Manager Hamilton Sundstrand, Associate Technical Fellow, Quality Eng. United Technologies Corporation Hamilton Sundstrand Phone no. (229) 291-7873 United Technologies Corporation EMAIL: mdmilward@aol.com W (860) 654-4800 FAX: (860) 654-2623 EMAIL: peter.teti@hs.utc.com Mark Milward has nineteen (19) years experience in Manufacturing and Quality Peter E. Teti is a Technical Fellow of Quality Engineering. Mark was a pioneer in the Engineering working for Hamilton Sundstrand for the introduction, development and application of past 24 years. Pete also serves as the Supplier Surface Mount Technology applications and Quality & Development Manager working to practices. He received his Principal Black Belt implement quality systems within the HS Supply in Lean manufacturing (2001). He is a ASQ Chain, specializing in Statistical Process Control, Certified Six Sigma Black Belt (2003) and a Continuous Improvement and Lean manufacturing. He Six Sigma Master Black Belt candidate (IIE). has developed the Process Certification and CQE At HS, Mark was responsible for standard work internal training programs at HS. Pete also teaches development, the implementation of Quality Assurance courses at Central Connecticut (Statistical Process Control) SPC and State University. He has a M.S. degree in Process Certification for Mechanical Operations Management from Rensselaer Operations (WLOX). Mark has a B.S. in Polytechnic Institute, and a B.S. in Industrial Manufacturing Engineering Technology from Engineering & Operations Research from the Barry University, Miami Fl, and an MBA from University of Massachusetts, at Amherst, MA. He is Nova Southeastern University, where he is Certified as a Quality Engineer, Quality Auditor and on leave from Doctoral studies in Business. Quality Manager from the American Society for Quality. 13

×