Comments on: Toyota Practical Problem Solving (PPS)—Monitor and Share

By: Christoph Roser

Christoph Roser — Thu, 28 Dec 2023 08:02:28 +0000

Hi Jonathan, good point. I have used Design of Experiments myself, too, and find them quite useful. The problem is that for a good DOE, you need to switch factors on and off or generally change the variable to find out its impact. E.g. for a simple 2 variable analysis you could have 4 points (Low/Low; Low/High; High/Low; and High/High). This would require you to “undo” previous improvements, which could be a bother and could be detrimental for the sake of understanding the system. Doing the improvements one by one may actually be best in most cases. But, an interesting point. Thanks for sharing!

By: Jonathan Roberts

Jonathan Roberts — Thu, 28 Dec 2023 07:47:47 +0000

Hi Christopher, in six sigma we are taught that one-factor-at-a-time experiments are inefficient. I appreciate this clashes with Toyota’s approach. But, what are your thoughts on say putting a Taguchi design in the monitor process & results?

By: Christoph Roser

Christoph Roser — Wed, 27 Dec 2023 04:00:03 +0000

Hi Michael, you commented on another article of this series, I think: Toyota Practical Problem Solving (PPS)—Countermeasures and Implement. I thought it was a useful comment. I sometimes delete comments if they are spam, others are removed automatically by my spam filter, but I haven't deleted one of yours nor is one of yours in my (recent) spam filter. Hope this clears up the confusion :)

By: Michael McLean

Michael McLean — Wed, 27 Dec 2023 03:03:02 +0000

I have made Comments earlier. Why are these not published?

By: Juan Carlos Viela

Juan Carlos Viela — Tue, 26 Dec 2023 11:09:42 +0000

In my opinion, when you improve but have not met the objective, the best is to stay where you have arrived and, from there, make new efforts to meet the initial objective.