This document outlines a Six Sigma project to improve the quality of education at MNIT. The project uses the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) methodology. In the Define phase, placement rates were identified as declining due to outdated syllabi and lack of skills. The Measure phase found variability in teaching quality. Analysis identified causes like outdated syllabi and lack of practical skills. Improvements proposed gaining practical skills through internships. The Control phase set limits to monitor teaching quality.

1. SIX SIGMA PROJECT
Title: Improving Quality of Education in MNIT
Submitted by:
Bhavanish Kr. Singh

2. Index
1. Aim
2. Why do we need this project?
3. Six sigma Tools - DMAIC
3.1. Define Phase
a) SIPOC Diagram
b) CTQ Diagram
3.2. Measure Phase
a) Histogram
b) Process Capability Analysis
3.3. Analysis Phase
a) Run Chart
b) Cause and Effect Diagram
c) Pareto Chart
3.4. Improvement Phase
a) FMEA Diagram
3.5. Control Phase
a) X bar Chart
b) R Chart
4. Conclusions
5. References

3. STEPS
Step 1. DEFINE the problem and scope of work of the project team. The
description of the problem should include the pain felt by the customer and/or
business as well as how long the issue has existed. Hence, identify the customer(s),
the project goals, and time frame for completion. The appropriate types of
problems have unlimited scope and scale, from employee problems to issues with
the production process or advertising. Regardless of the type of problem, it should
be systemic—part of an existing, steady-state process wherein the problem is not a
one-time event, but has caused pain for a couple of cycles.
Step 2. MEASURE the performance of current process. Identify what data is
available and from what source. Develop a plan to gather it. Gather the data and
summarize it, telling a story to describe the problem. This usually involves
utilization of graphical tools.
Step 3. ANALYZE the current performance to isolate the problem. Through
analysis (both statistical and qualitatively), begin to formulate and test hypothesis
about the root cause of the problem.
Step 4. IMPROVE the problem by selecting a solution. Based on the identified
root cause(s) in the prior step, directly address the cause with an improvement.
Brainstorm potential solutions, prioritize them based on customer requirements,
make a selection, and test to see if the solution resolves the problem.
Step 5. CONTROL the improved process or product performance to ensure the
target(s) are met. Once the solution has resolved the problem, the improvements
must be standardized and sustained over time. The standard-operating-procedures
may require revision, and a control plan should be put in place to monitor ongoing
performance. The project team transitions the standardized improvements and
sustaining control plan to the process players and closes out the project.
Problem Statement:
Last 3 Years, data shows decline in Placements due to lack of skills and unrevised
syllabus pattern according to the feedback of companies visiting MNIT.
Goal Statement:
Find out the problems and enhance the quality of education in MNIT.

4. Define Measure Analyse Improve Control
Project Progress Overview
Dates:
Planned 28/10/2015 12/11/2015 17/11/2015 20/11/2015 21/11/2015
D1. Map Project
D2. Approve Project
M1. CTQ Characteristics &
Standards
M2. Measurement System
Analysis
M3. Data Collection
A1. Baseline Process
A2. Performance
Objective
A3. Identify Drivers of
Variation
I1. Screen for Vital Xs
I2. Define Improved
Process
C1. MSA on Xs
C2. Improved Process Capability
C3. Establish Control Plan
Steps:
Key Deliverables:
• List of Customer(s)
and Project CTQs
• QFD / CTQ Tree
• Operational
definition,
Specification
limits, target,
defect definition
for Project Y(s)
• Data Collection
Plan
• Measurement
System Analysis
• Baseline of
Current Process
Performance
• Normality Test
• Statistical Goal
Statement for
Project
• List of Statistically
Significant Xs
• List of Vital
Few Xs
• Confirmation
Runs/Results
• Tolerances on
Vital Few Xs
• MSA Results on Xs
• Post Improvement
Capability
• Statistical
Confirmation of
Improvements
• Process Control
Plan
• Process Owner
Signoff
Tools:
 Survey
 Focus Groups
 Interviews
 Stakeholder
Analysis
 Data Collection Plan
 Continuous Gage
R&R
 Attribute Gage R&R
 Sample Size
Calculator
 Basic Statistics
 Histogram
 Run Charts
 Detailed Process
Mapping
 Nature of Work
 Flow of Work
 C & E Matrix
 Hypothesis Testing
 New Process
Mapping
 FMEA on new
process
 Process Modeling /
Simulation
 Continuous Gauge
R&R
 Discrete Gauge R&R
 Control Charts
 Hypothesis Testing
 Control Plan

5. Define Phase
Vision Statement:
To create a center for imparting technical education of international standards and
conduct research at the cutting edge of technology to meet the current and future
challenges of technological development.
Mission Statement:
To create technical manpower for meeting the current and future demands of industry:
To recognize education and research in close interaction with industry with emphasis on
the development of leadership qualities in the young men and women entering the
portals of the Institute with sensitivity to social development and eye for opportunities
for growth in the international perspective.
CASE:
Quality Policy:
MNIT shall strive to impart knowledge in such a manner as to achieve total satisfaction
of students, parents, employers, and the society.
Institute Motto:
योग: कर्मसुकौशलर्

6. CTQ
Syllabus
Method of teaching
Result of students
Experience
Quality of
teaching in MNIT
Industry
Requirement
Presentations
Projects
Practicals
Teaching
Experience
Research
Papers/Patent
s
Primitive
teaching
Interactive
teaching
E classes,
Projectors etc.
Placements
Skills
CGPA/%
Infrastructure
Audibility
Hygienic/ Healthy

7. Supplier Input Process Output Customer
SIPOC Diagram
Government,
Newspaper, Website
Documents, candidate,
rank, Eligible
candidates
College students
Student, Parents
Institute, Website, Book
Stores
Faculty, student,
infrastructure
Mark sheet, integrated
knowledge of all
branches
Student
Institute, Friends, Book
Stores, Seniors,
Professors
Faculty, student,
infrastructure
Theoretical
knowledge, mark-
sheet Student
Organization, Institute Company, training
Practical knowledge,
satisfied teachers Student
Institute
Company
infrastructure, eligible
candidate, placement
cell
Placed/ not placed
Student
Institute
Student authority,
infrastructure, cleared
mark-sheet
Under graduation
degree, happy parents
and teacher
Student, Parents
Apply for Admission
Procedure
Undergo basic knowledge
programme (Attend
classes , labs and
seminars/ Assessment )
Gain in depth knowledge
about branch
Gain practical overall
knowledge- Industrial
training
Appear for selection
procedure/ placement or
Higher Studies
Receive degree

8. Measure Phase
Using MiniTab 17 software bundle we performed Process Capability Analysis. In
this data, we do NOT have Upper Specification Limit (USL) as customer
satisfaction can increase up to any level.
DATA:
Faculty Avg. strength
of class
Avg. marks
of Student
Experience
(Years)
Average
Feedback
Rating
1 84.8 68.50 26 7
2 81.8 72.4 28 6
3 76.1 78.1 27 9
4 60.4 85.6 23 9
5 70.3 74.1 25 8
6 79.6 59.8 28 7
7 73.4 67.7 24 8
8 83.6 74.2 24 7
9 80.1 68.9 27 6
10 72.5 71.8 22 8
11 68.0 74.4 26 7
12 76.7 67.8 28 7
13 81.1 74.1 30 8
14 77 71.5 25 8
15 75.1 76.5 21 8
16 82.0 70.5 20 7
17 66.4 69.4 21 6
18 84.2 74.7 28 7
19 78.2 72.6 23 8
20 82.8 71.7 27 8

9. Histogram

10. Process Capability Analysis

14. Analyze Phase
Here we will find out the special causes of variations and find the relation with
other variables if possible.
In the run chart, we get the relation between average feedback ratings and the
experience of teaching faculty. It can be seen that there are somehow equal
number of ups and downs displayed in the performance. Our target is to improve
the down points and increase the overall performance of teaching staff.
Experience
(Years)
Average
Feedback
Rating
26 7
28 6
27 9
23 9
25 8
28 7
24 8
24 7
27 6
22 8
26 7
28 7
30 8
25 8
21 8
20 7
21 6
28 7
23 8
27 8
7
6
9 9
8
7
8
7
6
8
7 7
8 8 8
7
6
7
8 8
5
6
7
8
9
10
26 28 27 23 25 28 24 24 27 22 26 28 30 25 21 20 21 28 23 27
AVGFEEDBACKRATINGS
EXPERIENCE OF TEACHING
Run Chart

15. Cause and Effect Diagram
Input variables + Process variables = Output Variables
Lack of
technical
knowledge
Lack of skills
Increasing
no. of failing
students
Decline in
placements
Unsatisfied
Stakeholder
s
Confined and
unrevised
syllabus
No industrial
exposure
Less
Potential
candidates
Lack of soft
skills
Less interaction
of students and
teachers
Lack of Practical
experience
Students with
bad habits
Only theoretical
knowledge
judging criteria
Problem Statement

16. Gain practical overall
knowledge - Industrial
training
Improve Phase
INPUTS PROCESS OUTPUTS
Process Map
Documents,
candidate, rank,
Eligible
candidates
Faculty,
student,
infrastructure
College
students
Mark sheet,
integrated
knowledge of all
branches
Theoretical
knowledge,
mark sheet
Apply for admission process.
Undergo basic knowledge
program (Attend classes
labs and seminars/
Assessment )
Faculty,
student,
infrastructure
Gain in depth knowledge
about branch
Appear for selection
procedure/ placement or
Higher Studies
Receive degree
Company
infrastructure,
eligible
candidate,
placement cell
Placed/
not
placed
Student
authority,
infrastructure,
cleared mark-
sheet
Under
graduation
degree, happy
parents and
teachers
Practical
knowledge,
satisfied
teachers
Company,
training

17. Cause and Effect Matrix
Technical
knowledge
Non-
technical
knowledge
Personality
Process
Outputs
Importance
Process Step Correlation of Input to Output Total
Apply for admission procedure 0 0 0 0
Undergo basic knowledge program 5 7 6 161
Gain in depth knowledge of the opted branch 9 5 2 151
Gain practical overall knowledge 9 5 7 191
Appear for selection procedure 2 5 6 113
Receive degree 1 1 3 43

18. Failure Mode and Effect Analysis form

19. 2320252822282326
10
9
8
7
Experience
SampleMean
__
X=7.706
UCL=10.365
LB=7
2320252822282326
3
2
1
0
Experience
SampleRange
_
R=1
UCL=3.267
LCL=0
Xbar-R Chart of Average Feedback Rating
Tests performed with unequal sample sizes
Control Phase
We have set the lower limit to 7 as minimum quality rating found in MNIT teaching faculty.
There are 3 samples (sample no. 2, 8, 16) which are showing performance below lower
specification limit. Removing these points we have the improved chart as follows-
19181716151413121110987654321
10.0
7.5
5.0
Sample
SampleMean
__
X=7.45
UCL=10.110
LB=7
27282025282224252726
3
2
1
0
Experience
SampleRange
_
R=1
UCL=3.267
LCL=0
Xbar-R Chart of Average Feedback Rating
Tests performed with unequal sample sizes

20. Result:
R-chart accounts that the quality of teaching does not only depend on the
experience of teaching a teacher has but on several other factors as well.
Also, the performance of students cannot be judged by their attendance. So MNIT
should not just focus on the attendance of students.
We can also conclude that good infrastructure also helps in enhancing the
education standards.