Six Sigma learning evaluation model using Bloom’s Taxonomy

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to propose a learning evaluation model for Green Belts and Black Belts at the training level. A question bank has been developed on the basis of Bloom’s learning classification and applied to a group of employees who were being trained in Six Sigma (SS). Their results were then used to decide on the students’ approval and to guide the instructor’s plan of teaching for the next classes. Design/methodology/approach An action research has been conducted to develop a question bank of 310 questions based on the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy, to implement the evaluation model, and to apply it during the SS training. Findings The evaluation model has been designed so that the students do not proceed unless they have acquired the conceptual knowledge at each step of the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control) roadmap. At the end of the evaluation process, the students’ results have been analyzed. The number of mistakes in all stages of DMAIC was equal, implying that the training was uniform the entire roadmap. However, the opposite happened in each of the Bloom’s Taxonomy levels, showing that some skills need to be better stimulated by the instructor than others. Research limitations/implications The learning evaluation model proposed in this paper has been applied to a group of 70 employees who were being trained in SS at a Brazilian aircraft manufacturer. The data have been analyzed using Microsoft Excel® and Minitab® 17 Statistical Software. Originality/value Despite the abundance of courses offering the SS Green Belt and Black Belt certifications, there is no standard evaluation to ensure the training quality. Thus, this paper proposes an innovative learning evaluation model.

Critical analysis of Lean Six Sigma black belt certification courses offered in Brazil

“…These levels of cognition are based on the revised version of Bloom's taxonomy, which divides the cognitive domain into six levels: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate and create (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001). Bloom's taxonomy has been regarded as an important instrument to support the classification of educational objectives and facilitate the process of teaching, learning and cognitive development, including Six Sigma (Fonseca Amorim et al, 2018). Thus, the ASQ BoK includes the following cognition levels: analyze, apply, evaluate, and understand.…”

“…Antony et al (2021a, b) stated that there is no universal standard on the content of LSS courses for certification. There have been many attempts to standardize these courses for certifications, but despite efforts, there is still no single standard (Antony et al, 2019;Fonseca Amorim et al, 2018;Sreedharan et al, 2020). As a result, different content levels can be found in the LSS courses offered by certification institutions, posing a problem for both organizations and professionals seeking to compare, evaluate, and select a training institution to undertake certification (Laureani and Antony, 2011).…”

“…There have been many attempts to standardize these courses for certifications, but despite efforts, there is still no single standard (Antony et al. , 2019; Fonseca Amorim et al. , 2018; Sreedharan et al.…”

Evaluating lean six sigma implementations in financial services using soft system methodology

“…Alongside DMAIC there is one more method named DFLSS (design for LSS) or DMADV, which again employs five phases: define, measure, analyze, design, and verify, and aims to replace existing systems with new processes (Albliwi et al, 2017). Implementing the DMAIC model is not that much connected with money but the development of belt-based training infrastructure, which is expensive (Fonseca Amorim et al, 2018). On the other hand, many researchers have been strongly opposing the idea of DMAIC implementation with belt base training infrastructure (Ben Romdhane et al, 2017;.…”