Setting a Standard for Lean Six Sigma Belt Certification

Share | Rate this Article: (2.2 Stars | 22 Votes)   Thanks for your rating!

Does anyone else find it ironic that Lean Six Sigma—a successful methodology with a history of almost 25 years—still has no widely accepted independent standards to guide professional certification?

In the Define phase, we teach the need to turn customer requirements into operational definitions so we can clearly understand, in objective and practical terms, how to meet customer requirements. Absent an operational definition, we're guessing, and we run the risk of failing to meet those requirements—and that is just what is happening in this industry.

If we were to sample any 10 “certified” Black Belts, we would almost certainly find 10 very different levels of qualification. Early on, when companies such as GE provided their own certification for their own internal purposes, variability didn't matter much. But now, with a well developed market for "belts," hiring managers are often disappointed by the capability of "certified" Lean Six Sigma professionals. 
 
The lack of a globally accepted standard for Belt certification also leaves Lean Six Sigma open to unnecessary criticism from skeptics who like to deride the importance of process improvement. Of all professions, ours should be the last one to have to deal with this mess. Let’s raise the bar on certification standards.

So, How Did We Get to this Sorry State?

Almost daily, someone on a blog, LinkedIn group or Lean Six Sigma forum asks about Green Belt or Black Belt certification. How can I get it? Who offers the most respected certification? Will a certain certification get me a better job? The answers are highly subjective and never the same.

Throughout the history of Six Sigma (now Lean Six Sigma, really), no one has ever stepped forward to take ownership. There is no international governing board, and no government department to codify a set of rules or regulations.

Corporations like GE and Motorola put a structure around the methodology but had no interest in establishing or sharing an overarching standard, especially with competitors. Consultants and trainers jumped at the chance to spread the word and make a living, but had no real incentive or clout to create a standard. If one of the definitions of a successful deployment is to graduate as many belts as possible, then why not make it as easy as possible to be certified?

Indeed, the recent proliferation of schools, organizations and training providers that offer belt “certification” has only served to water down the very definition of the standard. Is it knowledge? Is it practice? Is it just an exam? At this point, who knows?

Continuing the Discussion on Accreditation Standards If you enjoyed this article by Bill Hathaway, you'll be interested in continuing this accreditation conversation at the Process Excellence Leaders Meeting - North America in Chicago, IL. Brian Smith, Manager Continuous Improvement Program, Northrop Grumman, will be leading the discussion session, "Accreditation," on Tuesday, September 14, 2010. You won't want to miss it!

Learn more

Lean Six Sigma Belt Certification Should Reflect How People Do the Work

Certification should endorse those activities and competencies that belts actually use in their process improvement work.

In the movies, it’s now a cliché: the heroic doctor who performs an emergency operation for the first time, one that he or she has only ever “read about.” In real life, would you really want to be attended by a doctor with no practical experience? You’d probably be dead. Extending the analogy to Lean Six Sigma, would you really want to unleash a "certified" but untested Black Belt on your company’s most important—and lucrative—processes?

The successful Belt is one who completes projects, delivers savings and removes waste. Yet the most common failing of existing “certifications” is that they require theory but little or no practice. To hurry along certification, some companies rely on simulated projects or project affidavits, but these are suspect and not the same as real projects. Many training providers lack the appetite for verifying experience because it’s hard to do, slows down the graduation process and requires a longer-term effort.

Should you be able to pay for and receive a Black Belt certificate without ever doing a project? Without a true measure of technical competency or project work, the definition of Black Belt or Green Belt becomes trivial.

A New Standard from The Ohio State University
 
Now is the time to put an end to the practice of conferring Lean Six Sigma credentials without any objective standard. This isn’t Little League soccer, where everyone gets a trophy for simply playing a game. Certification must be:

• Proposed by an objective body
• Inclusive of both theory and practice
• Testable and transferable
• Enforced by academics, industry and consultancies

In the past year, the Center for Operational Excellence (COE) at The Ohio State University (OSU) has worked with a council of academic faculty, industry leaders, and member companies to develop just such a robust, objective common standard. This rigorous, third-party standard, which reflects the most common scope of industry expectations, is now available for public use (http://fisher.osu.edu/centers/coe/lean-six-sigma-black-belt-certification-standards/).

The COE, an objective organization that does not provide certifications, has proposed the common standard as a way to bring greater uniformity and value to the Black Belt and Green Belt certification process. They aim to reverse the fragmentation of our industry and maintain belt certification that reflects both practice and theory. They are open to your feedback as they work to find common agreement on a single, rigorous, and global standard.

Join an Online Discussion on Lean Six Sigma Belt Certification Standards

On March 10, 2010, at 11:00 a.m. EST, OSU and MoreSteam will present an unprecedented and candid conversation on why the Lean Six Sigma industry needs a rigorous third-party certification standard. The presenters—Peg Pennington, Executive Director for The Center for Operational Excellence at Ohio State University, Rachel Lane, Associate Vice President, Business Excellence at Nationwide, and myself—will  represent the viewpoints of academia, businesses and training providers.

The one-hour webcast will feature a discussion on the current state of belt certification, the need for an impartial standard, what are the new COE Six Sigma Certification Standards, and how the new standards will better support Lean Six Sigma deployments and professionals. The program will conclude with an open forum for participants’ questions, comments and feedback.

If you are affected by the current state of certification, I encourage you to participate, reflect, and help decide the future of our industry. It’s time for certification that means something.  

Contributor: Bill Hathaway

Share |

Bill Hathaway is President and founder of MoreSteam.com, which was launched in February of 2000 as an Internet-based process improvement learning portal. Prior to creating MoreSteam, Hathaway spent 13 years in manufacturing, quality and operations management. After 10 years at Ford Motor Co., Hathaway then held executive level operations positions with Raytheon at Amana Home Appliances, and with Mansfield Plumbing Products. Hathaway earned an undergraduate finance degree from the University of Notre Dame, and graduate degree in business finance and operations from Northwestern University’s Kellogg Graduate School of Management.

You Should Check Out:

Finding the Green in Lean Six Sigma

Report Abuse   nwevans 05/27/2010 8:28:12 AM EDT I agree with all of the above. I recieved my Blackbelt from Ball State University where instead of 120 hours of training, we recieved over 500 hours that included a project within a company. This program is a hand-picked group of individuals from within the Universities many undergraduate programs. Rather than quick seminars on topics such as DOE and SPC, entire semesters are devoted to the subjects. But, is this appraoch effective? Graduated a year now, I think not. Although I have recieved my BB I feel short in some areas of BB development. Adriaan mentioned Change Management capabilities, conflict resolution, and in general Project Management abilities. These skills were not emphasized within the curriculum and should be. BB are expected to be well rounded with personal, technical, and creative ideals. Not all can be taught but should be explored within all GB and BB programs. Although great with the technical aspects of SS, I am now learning the soft side of business, to me, the more difficult aspect. It would have been great to learn theory on Human Resources, Operations Management, Project Management, etc. I like the idea of having one governing body that companies can rely on for certification. The comfort of knowing your product (BBs) before you buy is something we can all respect. For me, re-certifying through a higher governing institution would be ideal. Having a strong hold on SS and Lean tools and methods would only make re-certification easier, especially after gaining industry experience and practice. Nathan Evans Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   bhathaway@moresteam.com 03/12/2010 3:24:22 PM EST Tom, I agree that ASQ offers a BOK which is pretty close to the mark. In our business, since we generally customize the curricula for our larger customers, we've had unique visibility across a wide sample of the industry (over 1,800 corporate clients). From that perspective, the ASQ BOK is a bit light on Lean tools, but not far off. The bigger issues are with the ASQ assessment process: no operational definition of what is an acceptable project, requirement of only 1 project (industry practice is 2), no published standard for the BOK (what's a passing score?), no critical review of actual project work (an affidavit only), and a test that does not employ software. Who would hire a Black Belt who couldn't use statistical analysis software? I hear all too often from my clients that they require newly hired ASQ certified black belts to re-certify internally because concerns about project execution. I'd love to see ASQ become THE standard-setting organization, but that will require a recognition that the customer is the external hiring organization, not the ASQ membership - and the customer does not really care about the certification process being inexpensive and quick (1 project). Critical evaluation of multiple projects is messy and labor-intensive, entailing higher cost, but so be it. I believe the market is looking for certification that really means something. Oh, and I'm a senior member of ASQ unless they excommunicate me for heresy. Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   tmkubiak 03/09/2010 12:45:53 PM EST Bill, The author of the first comment is correct. ASQ has developed BOKs and certifications (which includes lean content) for both the GB and BB. I don't recall when the GB was issued, but the BB first came out in 2001. The processes for developing the BOKs and certification examinations are very rigorous. I am very surprised that you did not mention them in your comments. Regards, T. M. Kubiak co-author The Certified Six Sigma Black Belt Handbook Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   dancourtney 03/05/2010 1:38:05 PM EST I think that American Society for Quality offers an independent and widely accepted standard for Green Belt and Black Belt as well as a variety of other Quality Certifications. AME/SME offer a similar standard for Lean. They both have well defined BOKs. Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   Adriaan Mulder 03/04/2010 12:49:12 PM EST Dear Bill, seems like you created some fine materials. Waht I already now would suggest is that The BOK becomes BOKS. If you check for results you start with end in mind and combine that with technical knowledge. Fot BB certification however difficult I do believe you have to address Personal Leadership, Change Managent capabilities and therefore tools (read skills) like stakeholder management conflict resolution and internal selling skills should be part of a review or (project) assessment. After all these are the topics that really make the difference and bridge the gap between technical knowledge and lasting (breakthrough) results. Not an easy one but we shouldn't shy away. Adriaan Mulder Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment