1. DMAIC is an abbreviation of the five improvement steps it comprises: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and
Control. All of the DMAIC process steps are required and always proceed in the given order.
The five steps of DMAIC
Define[edit]
The purpose of this step is to clearly articulate the business problem, goal, potential resources, project scope and
high-level project timeline. This information is typically captured within project charter document. Write down
what you currently know. Seek to clarify facts, set objectives and form the project team. Define the following:
 A problem
 The customer(s)
 Voice of the customer (VOC) and Critical to Quality (CTQs) — what are the critical process outputs?
 The target process subject to DMAIC and other related business processes
 Project targets or goal
 Project boundaries or scope
 A project charter is often created and agreed upon during the Define step.
Measure[edit]
The purpose of this step is to objectively establish current baselines as the basis for improvement. This is a data
collection step, the purpose of which is to establish process performance baselines. The performance metric
baseline(s) from the Measure phase will be compared to the performance metric at the conclusion of the project
to determine objectively whether significant improvement has been made. The team decides on what should be
measured and how to measure it. It is usual for teams to invest a lot of effort into assessing the suitability of the
proposed measurement systems. Good data is at the heart of the DMAIC process:
 Identify the gap between current and required performance.
 Collect data to create a process performance capability baseline for the project metric, that is, the
process Y(s) (there may be more than one output).
 Assess the measurement system (for example, a gauge study) for adequate accuracy and precision.
 Establish a high level process flow baseline. Additional detail can be filled in later.
Analyze[edit]
The purpose of this step is to identify, validate and select root cause for elimination. A large number of potential
root causes (process inputs, X) of the project problem are identified via root cause analysis (for example a
fishbone diagram). The top 3-4 potential root causes are selected using multi-voting or other consensus tool for
further validation. A data collection plan is created and data are collected to establish the relative contribution of
each root causes to the project metric, Y. This process is repeated until "valid" root causes can be identified.
Within Six Sigma, often complex analysis tools are used. However, it is acceptable to use basic tools if these are
appropriate. Of the "validated" root causes, all or some can be
 List and prioritize potential causes of the problem

2.  Prioritize the root causes (key process inputs) to pursue in the Improve step
 Identify how the process inputs (Xs) affect the process outputs (Ys). Data is analyzed to understand the
magnitude of contribution of each root cause, X, to the project metric, Y. Statistical tests using p-values
accompanied by Histograms, Pareto charts, and line plots are often used to do this.
 Detailed process maps can be created to help pin-point where in the process the root causes reside, and
what might be contributing to the occurrence.
Improve[edit]
The purpose of this step is to identify, test and implement a solution to the problem; in part or in whole. Identify
creative solutions to eliminate the key root causes in order to fix and prevent process problems. Use
brainstorming or techniques like Six Thinking Hats and Random Word. Some projects can utilize complex
analysis tools like DOE (Design of Experiments), but try to focus on obvious solutions if these are apparent.
 Create innovative solutions
 Focus on the simplest and easiest solutions
 Test solutions using Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle
 Based on PDCA results, attempt to anticipate any avoidable risks associated with the "improvement"
using FMEA
 Create a detailed implementation plan
 Deploy improvements
Control[edit]
The purpose of this step is to sustain the gains. Monitor the improvements to ensure continued and sustainable
success. Create a control plan. Update documents, business process and training records as required.
A Control chart can be useful during the Control stage to assess the stability of the improvements over time by
serving as 1. a guide to continue monitoring the process and 2. provide a response plan for each of the measures
being monitored in case the process becomes unstable.

3. 1) Define.
L-3 CSW doesnot have a way to track configurationsdelivered. Thisaffectsconsistentperformance inthe
field, riskof legal actionandallowsSRA (SpecialRepairActivity)tobetterservice the customerandreduce
re-workinthe factorydiagnosingthe product,whichhashigherprioritythannew product. Currentlythe
processisfor the product beingreturnedisassignedtoSystemEngineeringandSystemTestEngineeringto
do the currenttest procedure todetermine whatfailedandwhatneedstobe upgraded. The System
Engineerthenreviewsthe EngineeringchangesandsuggestsaBOPto addressthe problem. Norecordis
keptinone place to determine whatwasappliedtothe returnedequipment. Thisprojectistocombine the
past historyof all the hardware inthe hardware asshippedfromthe factoryinitiallyandrecordchanges
whenitis returnedforrepairor upgrade. This wasnot available. The chart above if a solidline was
implementedforthe project. DottedindicatesPhase2whichwas fundedbutnevercompleted.
2) Measure :
Thiswill solve amajorhole in the whole configuration tracking of the life cycle of a part (IT manager CSW).
One half the time on the floor is used to characterize the repaired item. Taking up production equipment
and humanassetsas itis not recordedinone easilyaccessible database. The hierarchyisnot known due to
assembly recording disconnects, available to a large factory staff. It also saves records that are easily
reportable to the customer so they can place orders for the upgrades they did not get during early
productionunits. This will reduce the turn around time from a 6-18 month period to the targeted 45 days.
3) Analyze
The root cause is the quantity demand on the production floor. As an example. Global Hawk, a DARPA
project was pushed into service after 9-11 and put into service and production reducing the lead time needed
to one third of the prototypes. What took 18 months to produce, now required only 6. The government

4. required repairs to be first priority over new build production. They also required that a record be kept of
each system configuration. These records were kept in various places, but not linked to a family tree for each
system. This caused a bottleneck as the repairs started coming back and a “trial and error” system was used to
determine what had been shipped initially or after a repair. Pressure on the floor test and repair assets were
stressed as this iterative diagnosis system was used. This was complicated by the fact that L-3 allowed their
customers to pick and choose the Engineering Changes they wished to put into any given assembly part
number. A dash revision gave you the last full compliment of Engineering changes when shipped, but
partials were more common after it returned for repair and upgrade. A partial dash was common and not
accessible. A full engineering change order implementation record was needed. To do this several data
bases needed to be linked and easily available to decision makers.
4) Improve.
5 data input programs data bases needed to be combined. A cross functional team comprising of the
owner of each data base and program needed to work together to produce an easily searchable
master source. A training course was developed. The summary of the data base is shown below.
The hierarchy can be shown by picking an anchor part number in the table, or placing it in the search
function. Exploding above and below that part in the deliverable system and each part's
configuration is a double click away. Program managers found easily fielded parts that needed
upgrade and which aircraft they were installed in.

5. 5) Control
Turnaround time was reduced to the required 45 days where implemented. If TAT drifted up, a review
of the processes the part was going through would indicate if the repairs were based on the S/N
Hierarchy record or if an iterative record was redundantly used. Using the database tool, a part that isn’t
functioning as expected could potentially stay in the field and have a field upgrade sent to them.
SUMMARY PAGE:
This is an IT spotlight page on the INTRANET shortly after the release of the tool. Unfortunately about
a third of the target audience took the course and training was given word of mouth. The record is still
used today even after Siemens’ SAP was implemented. It helped a number of people, mainly program
managers give their customer a record of what was in their systems and what was needed. It saved them
weeks of time. Those that used it couldn’t live without it.

6. Voice of the customer and stock holders.
With this tool, a summary of the Engineering changes this encoding feature requires can be quickly compiled
and reported. Without it, and having nearly hundreds to upgrade, difficult to report comprehensibly.